[ANN] cudaMiner & ccMiner CUDA based mining applications [Windows/Linux/MacOSX]

[cbuchner1]

What kind of yield does a Titan get

I've had reports of 290 kHash for a single Titan.

Plus the guy owning the www.nvminer.com domain claims he has optimized it to do 460 kHash.
Not sure what the status of his GPL compliance is at the moment and whether he is offering
binary downloads again.

Christian

[BrewCrewFan]

What kind of yield does a Titan get

I've had reports of 290 kHash for a single Titan.

Plus the guy owning the www.nvminer.com domain claims he has optimized it to do 460 kHash.
Not sure what the status of his GPL compliance is at the moment and whether he is offering
binary downloads again.

Christian

When you think about it though... spending 700+ on a card for 460khash verse one for a 1/3 of the price to get as much...

[GoldBit89]

i have discovered a weird error: i have been getting shares ok and been reporting to pools ok and having them match and since i am new to this still virtually especially with mining, this is a first of this error i have seen on any of the forums.
It appears that when i have found and solved a block, i get this error and i am not credited with finding it but the pool gets credit for solving it tho jsut with a "unknown" finder. error is this:

"result does not validate on CPU!"

this is the latest version and i love the program, as it has boosted my hashes greatly but i could not figure out this odd bug.

anyone have any ideas?

It means you're using an invalid configuration for your card. If you were using an old version and upgrade. You must Autotune with the new version. The old configuration may not be valid anymore

well considering i have it set to autotune, kinda hard for me to believe i have it set incorrectly. What i notice too it si only with pools this error occurs and watching the update from command prompt to webpage appears to happen when the pool current round counter goes negative before starting a new round.
If my autotune is not working right, any ideas on how to fix it?

[Eli0t]

i have discovered a weird error: i have been getting shares ok and been reporting to pools ok and having them match and since i am new to this still virtually especially with mining, this is a first of this error i have seen on any of the forums.
It appears that when i have found and solved a block, i get this error and i am not credited with finding it but the pool gets credit for solving it tho jsut with a "unknown" finder. error is this:

"result does not validate on CPU!"

this is the latest version and i love the program, as it has boosted my hashes greatly but i could not figure out this odd bug.

anyone have any ideas?

It means you're using an invalid configuration for your card. If you were using an old version and upgrade. You must Autotune with the new version. The old configuration may not be valid anymore

well considering i have it set to autotune, kinda hard for me to believe i have it set incorrectly. What i notice too it si only with pools this error occurs and watching the update from command prompt to webpage appears to happen when the pool current round counter goes negative before starting a new round.
If my autotune is not working right, any ideas on how to fix it?

look for some settings for your card in the google spreadsheet https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjMqJzI7_dCvdG9fZFN1Vjd0WkFOZmtlejltd0JXbmc#gid=2

[YacLives]

i have discovered a weird error: i have been getting shares ok and been reporting to pools ok and having them match and since i am new to this still virtually especially with mining, this is a first of this error i have seen on any of the forums.
It appears that when i have found and solved a block, i get this error and i am not credited with finding it but the pool gets credit for solving it tho jsut with a "unknown" finder. error is this:

"result does not validate on CPU!"

this is the latest version and i love the program, as it has boosted my hashes greatly but i could not figure out this odd bug.

anyone have any ideas?

It means you're using an invalid configuration for your card. If you were using an old version and upgrade. You must Autotune with the new version. The old configuration may not be valid anymore

well considering i have it set to autotune, kinda hard for me to believe i have it set incorrectly. What i notice too it si only with pools this error occurs and watching the update from command prompt to webpage appears to happen when the pool current round counter goes negative before starting a new round.
If my autotune is not working right, any ideas on how to fix it?

what card are you using, what driver version, what windows version are you using?

[GoldBit89]

i have discovered a weird error: i have been getting shares ok and been reporting to pools ok and having them match and since i am new to this still virtually especially with mining, this is a first of this error i have seen on any of the forums.
It appears that when i have found and solved a block, i get this error and i am not credited with finding it but the pool gets credit for solving it tho jsut with a "unknown" finder. error is this:

"result does not validate on CPU!"

this is the latest version and i love the program, as it has boosted my hashes greatly but i could not figure out this odd bug.

anyone have any ideas?

It means you're using an invalid configuration for your card. If you were using an old version and upgrade. You must Autotune with the new version. The old configuration may not be valid anymore

well considering i have it set to autotune, kinda hard for me to believe i have it set incorrectly. What i notice too it si only with pools this error occurs and watching the update from command prompt to webpage appears to happen when the pool current round counter goes negative before starting a new round.
If my autotune is not working right, any ideas on how to fix it?

what card are you using, what driver version, what windows version are you using?

Geforce 9600 gt (64cuda,700grclock,900memclock-modified to 2000,5.5.1 cuda driver 1968 shaders)
320.18 nvidia driver
windows 7 64 bit
using guiminer .04 with cuda miner 4/30/2013 in command prompt
settings :
"C:\xxxxxx\xxxxxx\Desktop\guiminer-scrypt_win32_binaries_v0.04\cudaminer\cudaminer.exe" -o http://www.xxxxx.com:8080/ -O xxxxxxx:xxxxxx -d 0 -i 1 -l auto -C 0 -m 1

[Eli0t]

try -l 8x4 or -l 16x2

[cbuchner1]

For those contemplating getting a GT 640 , here is a deviceQuery of such a Revision 2.0 model
with the GK208 chip. Note the clock speed of 1046 MHz and the bus width of 64 bit.

It does have the nice barrel shifter hardware feature that speeds up crypto operations a bit.

Earlier GK107 based devices used a clock speed around 900 MHz and a 128 bit memory bus. So I will have to return my newly ordered GT640 because I accidentially got myself a GK107 model. Watch out for the 64 bit bus and the ~1050 MHZ clock speeds, then you're safe. And get a GDDR5 model, otherwise memory performance might suck.

Code:

   Device 1: "GeForce GT 640"
    CUDA Driver Version / Runtime Version 5.5 / 5.5
    CUDA Capability Major/Minor version number: 3.5
    Total amount of global memory: 1023 MBytes (1073020928 bytes)
    ( 2) Multiprocessors x (192) CUDA Cores/MP: 384 CUDA Cores
    GPU Clock rate: 1046 MHz (1.05 GHz)
    Memory Clock rate: 2505 Mhz
    Memory Bus Width: 64-bit
    L2 Cache Size: 524288 bytes
    Max Texture Dimension Size (x,y,z) 1D=(65536), 2D=(65536,65536), 3D=(4096,4096,4096)
    Max Layered Texture Size (dim) x layers 1D=(16384) x 2048, 2D=(16384,16384) x 2048
    Total amount of constant memory: 65536 bytes
    Total amount of shared memory per block: 49152 bytes
    Total number of registers available per block: 65536
    Warp size: 32
    Maximum number of threads per multiprocessor: 2048
    Maximum number of threads per block: 1024
    Maximum sizes of each dimension of a block: 1024 x 1024 x 64
    Maximum sizes of each dimension of a grid: 2147483647 x 65535 x 65535
    Maximum memory pitch: 2147483647 bytes
    Texture alignment: 512 bytes
    Concurrent copy and kernel execution: Yes with 1 copy engine(s)
    Run time limit on kernels: No
    Integrated GPU sharing Host Memory: No
    Support host page-locked memory mapping: Yes
    Alignment requirement for Surfaces: Yes
    Device has ECC support: Disabled
    Device supports Unified Addressing (UVA): Yes
    Device PCI Bus ID / PCI location ID: 4 / 0
    Compute Mode:
    < Default (multiple host threads can use ::cudaSetDevice() with device simultaneously) >

[GoldBit89]

try -l 8x4 or -l 16x2

tried both of them and even included the "S" prefix and ironically I did get my first credit for finding a block but right before and right after that block were both unknown and it seems they have picked up frequency. So far I still have only gotten that 1 found block .

how many different variations are there of those?  ive seen these so far during autotuning:

16x1 s15x3 s8x4 s14x2 s13x2 16x2 8x4

[Eli0t]

try -l 8x4 or -l 16x2

tried both of them and even included the "S" prefix and ironically I did get my first credit for finding a block but right before and right after that block were both unknown and it seems they have picked up frequency. So far I still have only gotten that 1 found block .

how many different variations are there of those?  ive seen these so far during autotuning:

16x1 s15x3 s8x4 s14x2 s13x2 16x2 8x4

choose the one that gives you the best speed but there are many variants that work best on different cards
i wish there was a debugslow option to give more accurate readings but you can see them all using the -D switch in the cmd line
if your quick you can use select all and copy to paste them into a text file and test promising candidates

[GoldBit89]

try -l 8x4 or -l 16x2

tried both of them and even included the "S" prefix and ironically I did get my first credit for finding a block but right before and right after that block were both unknown and it seems they have picked up frequency. So far I still have only gotten that 1 found block .

how many different variations are there of those?  ive seen these so far during autotuning:

16x1 s15x3 s8x4 s14x2 s13x2 16x2 8x4

choose the one that gives you the best speed but there are many variants that work best on different cards
i wish there was a debugslow option to give more accurate readings but you can see them all using the -D switch in the cmd line
if your quick you can use select all and copy to paste them into a text file and test promising candidates

ok i will try the -D switch

about the unknown error--i tried a different pool--same scrypt type and no unknowns finder but so far no invalid cpu validations either--im starting to wonder if pool software maybe.

[y2kcamaross]

Can someone give me soem settings to try with 2 gtx 780s, I have no clue what I'm doing, I only have 1 780 going for soem reason and it's only hashing at 37 k/hash

[kenshin23]

Will try using this with my GTX670. Never got to compile rpcminer (optimized CUDA version, here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=215958.0) in windows, and profitability for scrypt is much better anyway, so I'll give this a shot and post back/update the google docs with results. 190-210 KH/s sounds great compared to 95 MH/s using cgminer (for BTC)

[cbuchner1]

Pooler's cpuminer was recently updated with stratum support.

I will try to integrate the changes into cudaminer soon (for those who don't know, cudaminer is a fork of cpuminer)

Christian

[Eli0t]

Pooler's cpuminer was recently updated with stratum support.

I will try to integrate the changes into cudaminer soon (for those who don't know, cudaminer is a fork of cpuminer)

Christian

great news! there was also a bugfix https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=55038.msg2507807#msg2507807

[detro]

Awesome to hear about the stratum support!

Anywho, Im noticing a significant up and down in my results and was hoping i could get some feedback from anyone.
C:\Users\detro\Documents\cudaminer-2013-04-30\cudaminer-2013-04-30>cudaminer.exe
 -o http://ltc.kattare.com:9332 -O worker.1:passwerd -l 64x2 -C 1 -m 1

----
[2013-06-19 20:36:04] accepted: 22/23 (95.65%), 115.03 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:36:21] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 2240512 hashes, 130.45 khash/s

[2013-06-19 20:36:21] accepted: 23/24 (95.83%), 130.45 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:36:23] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 221184 hashes, 126.59 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:36:23] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 8192 hashes, 75.02 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:36:23] accepted: 24/25 (96.00%), 75.02 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:36:23] accepted: 25/26 (96.15%), 75.02 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:36:35] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 1351680 hashes, 110.52 khash/s

[2013-06-19 20:36:37] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 139264 hashes, 81.90 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:36:38] accepted: 26/27 (96.30%), 81.90 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:36:48] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 950272 hashes, 91.74 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:36:48] accepted: 27/28 (96.43%), 91.74 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:36:53] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 565248 hashes, 97.40 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:36:54] accepted: 28/29 (96.55%), 97.40 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:37:25] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 3977216 hashes, 124.67 khash/s

[2013-06-19 20:37:26] accepted: 29/30 (96.67%), 124.67 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:37:44] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 2211840 hashes, 124.48 khash/s

[2013-06-19 20:37:44] accepted: 30/31 (96.77%), 124.48 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:37:46] LONGPOLL detected new block
[2013-06-19 20:37:46] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 245760 hashes, 105.03 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:38:11] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 2830336 hashes, 112.06 khash/s

[2013-06-19 20:38:12] accepted: 31/32 (96.88%), 112.06 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:38:46] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 3923968 hashes, 112.85 khash/s

[2013-06-19 20:38:59] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 1495040 hashes, 118.17 khash/s

[2013-06-19 20:38:59] accepted: 32/33 (96.97%), 118.17 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:39:11] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 1032192 hashes, 87.41 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:39:11] accepted: 33/34 (97.06%), 87.41 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:39:14] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 327680 hashes, 85.74 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:39:15] accepted: 34/35 (97.14%), 85.74 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:39:17] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 262144 hashes, 109.12 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:39:17] accepted: 35/36 (97.22%), 109.12 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:39:25] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 765952 hashes, 97.03 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:39:25] accepted: 36/37 (97.30%), 105.03 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:39:40] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 1982464 hashes, 125.82 khash/s

[2013-06-19 20:39:41] accepted: 37/38 (97.37%), 125.82 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:39:46] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 688128 hashes, 129.74 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:39:47] accepted: 38/39 (97.44%), 129.74 khash/s (yay!!!)


And so on. I have also noticed this using simple auto tune but found i was seeing those rises from 80-80khs to 130 ALOT less than with the settings im using now and also the fan speed would go up and down with short bursts of work followed by a lot of idling. Also when viewing GPU usage in process hacker it only shows crss.exe utilizing my gpu with the following string, but its still fairly minimal GPU usage.

%SystemRoot%\system32\csrss.exe ObjectDirectory=\Windows SharedSection=1024,20480,768 Windows=On SubSystemType=Windows ServerDll=basesrv,1 ServerDll=winsrv:UserServerDllInitialization,3 ServerDll=winsrv:ConServerDllInitialization,2 ServerDll=sxssrv,4 ProfileControl=Off MaxRequestThreads=16

Im in a core i7, 12gb of ram with a gtx 560 ti and using a proper power supply so the gpu isnt lacking.

Any and all suggestions or comments on what is going on and how i can remediate it fto get things a bit more steady would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

[Eli0t]

heres my 560ti settings  -i 0 -C 2 -l 32x4 -m 1
i recommend nvidia inspector for fan control, it also shows GPU load, i like to keep mine under 80C

[2013-06-20 03:12:20] accepted: 142/143 (99.30%), 137.25 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-20 03:12:21] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 126976 hashes, 130.63 khash/s
[2013-06-20 03:12:21] accepted: 143/144 (99.31%), 130.63 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-20 03:12:25] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 466944 hashes, 136.13 khash/s
[2013-06-20 03:12:25] accepted: 144/145 (99.31%), 136.13 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-20 03:12:33] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 1138688 hashes, 136.95 khash/s
[2013-06-20 03:12:33] accepted: 145/146 (99.32%), 136.95 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-20 03:12:36] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 331776 hashes, 136.58 khash/s
[2013-06-20 03:12:36] accepted: 146/147 (99.32%), 136.58 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-20 03:13:03] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 3739648 hashes, 137.02 khash/s
[2013-06-20 03:13:03] accepted: 147/148 (99.32%), 137.02 khash/s (yay!!!)

 

[legitnick]

Thanks, im using this miner and it works fabulous!!

[gchil0]

Pooler's miner was recently updated to support stratum.  Would it be difficult to incorporate those changes into cudaminer?

Edit:  Nevermind.  I missed the same question above in a quick scan of the thread.   

[YacLives]

Awesome to hear about the stratum support!

Anywho, Im noticing a significant up and down in my results and was hoping i could get some feedback from anyone.
C:\Users\detro\Documents\cudaminer-2013-04-30\cudaminer-2013-04-30>cudaminer.exe
 -o http://ltc.kattare.com:9332 -O worker.1:passwerd -l 64x2 -C 1 -m 1

----
[2013-06-19 20:36:04] accepted: 22/23 (95.65%), 115.03 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:36:21] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 2240512 hashes, 130.45 khash/s

[2013-06-19 20:36:21] accepted: 23/24 (95.83%), 130.45 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:36:23] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 221184 hashes, 126.59 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:36:23] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 8192 hashes, 75.02 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:36:23] accepted: 24/25 (96.00%), 75.02 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:36:23] accepted: 25/26 (96.15%), 75.02 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:36:35] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 1351680 hashes, 110.52 khash/s

[2013-06-19 20:36:37] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 139264 hashes, 81.90 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:36:38] accepted: 26/27 (96.30%), 81.90 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:36:48] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 950272 hashes, 91.74 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:36:48] accepted: 27/28 (96.43%), 91.74 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:36:53] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 565248 hashes, 97.40 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:36:54] accepted: 28/29 (96.55%), 97.40 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:37:25] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 3977216 hashes, 124.67 khash/s

[2013-06-19 20:37:26] accepted: 29/30 (96.67%), 124.67 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:37:44] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 2211840 hashes, 124.48 khash/s

[2013-06-19 20:37:44] accepted: 30/31 (96.77%), 124.48 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:37:46] LONGPOLL detected new block
[2013-06-19 20:37:46] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 245760 hashes, 105.03 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:38:11] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 2830336 hashes, 112.06 khash/s

[2013-06-19 20:38:12] accepted: 31/32 (96.88%), 112.06 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:38:46] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 3923968 hashes, 112.85 khash/s

[2013-06-19 20:38:59] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 1495040 hashes, 118.17 khash/s

[2013-06-19 20:38:59] accepted: 32/33 (96.97%), 118.17 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:39:11] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 1032192 hashes, 87.41 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:39:11] accepted: 33/34 (97.06%), 87.41 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:39:14] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 327680 hashes, 85.74 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:39:15] accepted: 34/35 (97.14%), 85.74 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:39:17] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 262144 hashes, 109.12 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:39:17] accepted: 35/36 (97.22%), 109.12 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:39:25] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 765952 hashes, 97.03 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:39:25] accepted: 36/37 (97.30%), 105.03 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:39:40] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 1982464 hashes, 125.82 khash/s

[2013-06-19 20:39:41] accepted: 37/38 (97.37%), 125.82 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2013-06-19 20:39:46] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 560 Ti, 688128 hashes, 129.74 khash/s
[2013-06-19 20:39:47] accepted: 38/39 (97.44%), 129.74 khash/s (yay!!!)


And so on. I have also noticed this using simple auto tune but found i was seeing those rises from 80-80khs to 130 ALOT less than with the settings im using now and also the fan speed would go up and down with short bursts of work followed by a lot of idling. Also when viewing GPU usage in process hacker it only shows crss.exe utilizing my gpu with the following string, but its still fairly minimal GPU usage.

%SystemRoot%\system32\csrss.exe ObjectDirectory=\Windows SharedSection=1024,20480,768 Windows=On SubSystemType=Windows ServerDll=basesrv,1 ServerDll=winsrv:UserServerDllInitialization,3 ServerDll=winsrv:ConServerDllInitialization,2 ServerDll=sxssrv,4 ProfileControl=Off MaxRequestThreads=16

Im in a core i7, 12gb of ram with a gtx 560 ti and using a proper power supply so the gpu isnt lacking.

Any and all suggestions or comments on what is going on and how i can remediate it fto get things a bit more steady would be appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Can i suggest, if you are mining with a cpu at the same time then lower the cores used by one and test again, so on and so forth. i notice mine fluctuates like this and because i have the fans set to run at a temp it reaches when its at full load i notice it switches off alot and came to the conclusion i wasn't allowing the cpu to feed it info.
Might not be your prob but worth a shot