Bitcoin Forum
July 04, 2024, 11:29:04 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 27.0 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 [575] 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 ... 1135 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN] cudaMiner & ccMiner CUDA based mining applications [Windows/Linux/MacOSX]  (Read 3426881 times)
djm34
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1400
Merit: 1050


View Profile WWW
April 27, 2014, 11:19:01 AM
 #11481

The dev for JackpotCoin posted that they will hardfork the coin as a "fix" to the faster algorithm code... hmmm

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=584481.msg6413849#msg6413849



the question is did they know about it previously ?
In the way the jackpotcoin.cl is written, it would be difficult for them to say they didn't know...
Ultrafast algo first then 2nd round (or not) of slow crap.
(they shouldn't have released their own miner  Grin that's what killed that coin... I mean their profit).

Waiting for their hard-fork with impatience: keccak+somethingelse (for sure this time) just need to select the fastest second algo and
do the same trick.
This coin is definitely a joke... (unless they put one slow crap first (but still, you can always bypass 3/4 of the logic), this coin will still be a joke after the hardfork)

djm34 facebook page
BTC: 1NENYmxwZGHsKFmyjTc5WferTn5VTFb7Ze
Pledge for neoscrypt ccminer to that address: 16UoC4DmTz2pvhFvcfTQrzkPTrXkWijzXw
cayars
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168
Merit: 100


View Profile
April 27, 2014, 11:51:22 AM
 #11482

Chris,

1) I know you are busy adding new features and algorithms to the programs.  But I was wondering if there is any plans to merge the features of cudaminer and ccminer into just one program? Kind of gets confusing trying to remember which version to run for what coin etc.  Not a big deal but was just wondering if this is in the pipeline or if you plan on keeping them separate programs.

2) Also since you had originally said you were going to try and release the new killer groestl by EOM.  Have you figured out a way to do that yet being able to protect your code?

3) Have you taken a look at MNR https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=577437.0 Hefty1 implementation minus the voting?  I'd imagine the HVC code with only slight modifications could work on MNR too.  Have you given this any consideration?

4) THANK YOU so much for all your hard work!

Carlo
bigjme
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 27, 2014, 12:11:14 PM
 #11483

yeh i can see a lot of people are going to ask, here is 32bit and 64bit ccminer 0.6 compiled
https://mega.co.nz/#!Aw13XIYD!ETSB1GRSQdmqGt1jnlMLV4ZOhJ__qtfOSc0vOMKyUQY
Thanks bigjme. Is this Compute 3.5? I tried using your compile with my same old groestl bat file. The performance was worse. From 3100+ kh/s down to ~2450kh/s. You experiencing any difference?

on Windows this should now be built in four flavours, when done correctly Wink

Compute 2.0  with #define MAXWELL_OR_FERMI 1   <-- Fermi
Compute 3.0  with #define MAXWELL_OR_FERMI 0   <-- old Kepler
Compute 3.5  with #define MAXWELL_OR_FERMI 0   <-- highend Kepler and GT630/640 with compute 3.5
Compute 3.5  with #define MAXWELL_OR_FERMI 1   <-- for Maxwell

the flag must be set in both .cu modules with "groestl" in its name. It affects
the speed optimization of the Groestl code.

at some point I will code a runtime selection of the MAXWELL_OR_FERMI flag.

Christian



I'm guessing the build bigjme made was for maxwell and that's why my 670 in the system is reporting crazy high hashrate, but is there a chance it's actually hashing between 1-2Mhash? lol  (I normally run separate bat files but I just left it since it looks like I've missed the train on this one anyways)

I just compiled the build straight from github sorry guys.

Owner of: cudamining.co.uk
Dotcommie
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 27, 2014, 12:52:57 PM
 #11484


I'm guessing the build bigjme made was for maxwell and that's why my 670 in the system is reporting crazy high hashrate, but is there a chance it's actually hashing between 1-2Mhash? lol  (I normally run separate bat files but I just left it since it looks like I've missed the train on this one anyways)

I just compiled the build straight from github sorry guys.

Hah, no worries.  That's just on my desktop which has 2x750s and 1x670.  750s are at about 9800khs.  My other rigs are all maxwell and work fine. That coin looks to be dead already so i'm gonna skip it anyways.
xfelinho
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 68
Merit: 10


View Profile
April 27, 2014, 12:58:36 PM
 #11485

can somebody compile it for maxwell cards pls?
bigjme
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 27, 2014, 01:20:09 PM
 #11486

yeh i will compile it now
christian if you put nvml into it, can't you get it to query the card for compute version then just get it to change from that?

EDIT:

soo i compiled it with #define MAXWELL_OR_FERMI 1, and compute 3.5
on groestl i am still seeing a 600khash/s drop

Owner of: cudamining.co.uk
cbuchner1 (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 502


View Profile
April 27, 2014, 01:29:08 PM
 #11487

yeh i will compile it now
christian if you put nvml into it, can't you get it to query the card for compute version then just get it to change from that?

EDIT:

soo i compiled it with #define MAXWELL_OR_FERMI 1, and compute 3.5
on groestl i am still seeing a 600khash/s drop

what CUDA toolkit was used? I've tested with 5.5

bigjme
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 27, 2014, 01:29:55 PM
Last edit: April 27, 2014, 01:49:39 PM by bigjme
 #11488

5.5  Sad
i will leave it to run for a while as it may not have adjusted to diff properly? no idea

UPDATE:

ok so its been running a while now, it is exactly 600khash/s drop
2.8MH/s down from 3.4MH/s

so the drop is exactly the same even with overclocks

this might sound daft, but did you test it on x1 risers? if not i wonder if the table implementation is having a cut back on speeds due to the risers?

Owner of: cudamining.co.uk
cbuchner1 (OP)
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756
Merit: 502


View Profile
April 27, 2014, 02:12:03 PM
 #11489

5.5  Sad
i will leave it to run for a while as it may not have adjusted to diff properly? no idea

UPDATE:

ok so its been running a while now, it is exactly 600khash/s drop
2.8MH/s down from 3.4MH/s

so the drop is exactly the same even with overclocks

this might sound daft, but did you test it on x1 risers? if not i wonder if the table implementation is having a cut back on speeds due to the risers?

hey it would appear I have a typo in the cuda_groestlcoin.cu (and possibly also in the cuda_myriadgroest.cu) file.

#if MAXWELL_OR_FEMRI

should say

#if MAXWELL_OR_FERMI

instead. Then the switch should work as intended. Sorry for the inconvenience.

Christian

antonio8
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1386
Merit: 1000


View Profile
April 27, 2014, 02:39:03 PM
 #11490

@cbuchner1

I know this was brought up a while ago but wanted to ask again.

Have you thought about adding an hard pay to your miner yet to help support it. I know some people might not like it but I like how Claymore did his XPM miner. Hard coded at 10% but you can turn it off and it slows down the speed of the miner. I have no problem paying him the 10% fee that I find. He updates regular so I think the method works.

I see it as a win/win situation. You get paid for your time and hard work and we get coins that we would not have gotten as fast without your miner. I don't know if your ccminer is based on another miner but I have seen another where part of the fee went to the original miner's creator also.

If you are going to leave your BTC on an exchange please send it to this address instead 1GH3ub3UUHbU5qDJW5u3E9jZ96ZEmzaXtG, I will at least use the money better than someone who steals it from the exchange. Thanks Wink
bigjme
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 27, 2014, 02:54:02 PM
 #11491

Sorry for the inconvenience.

Christian

sloppy work! lmao i am compiling it with the changes now, will let you all know Smiley

update: soo i changed it, same performance as before, was that to be expected?

Owner of: cudamining.co.uk
Dotcommie
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 476
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 27, 2014, 02:56:48 PM
 #11492

yeh i will compile it now
christian if you put nvml into it, can't you get it to query the card for compute version then just get it to change from that?

EDIT:

soo i compiled it with #define MAXWELL_OR_FERMI 1, and compute 3.5
on groestl i am still seeing a 600khash/s drop

The version you compiled originally was already compiled for maxwell. I guess the other poster was confused cause i said my 670 was giving crazy numbers but my maxwell cards were fine.
bigjme
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 27, 2014, 02:58:56 PM
 #11493

The version you compiled originally was already compiled for maxwell. I guess the other poster was confused cause i said my 670 was giving crazy numbers but my maxwell cards were fine.

actually the version you had was the one with these settings
Compute 3.5  with #define MAXWELL_OR_FERMI 0   <-- highend Kepler and GT630/640 with compute 3.5

but obviously christian had his spelling issue so we will see

Owner of: cudamining.co.uk
nomad1109
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 100


Medichain: The Medical Big-Data Platform


View Profile
April 27, 2014, 03:19:44 PM
 #11494

but obviously christian had his spelling issue so we will see

Let us all know if there is improvements please, and thanks for testing these things, I know it takes some time.

bigjme
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 27, 2014, 03:21:18 PM
 #11495

Let us all know if there is improvements please, and thanks for testing these things, I know it takes some time.

for my 750Ti's i didnt see an improvement in the new release, mining groestl that is. but i believe that christian uses the code to bypass the table lookups so the cards that can take advantage do, and those that cant, dont

Owner of: cudamining.co.uk
atc1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 27, 2014, 03:27:22 PM
 #11496

So what improvements does v0.6 of ccminer have?

bigjme
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 27, 2014, 03:28:07 PM
 #11497

So what improvements does v0.6 of ccminer have?

the ability to mine jackpotcoin

Owner of: cudamining.co.uk
nomad1109
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 100


Medichain: The Medical Big-Data Platform


View Profile
April 27, 2014, 03:34:01 PM
 #11498

the ability to mine jackpotcoin

I would have to imagine that right now Christian is about public enemy #1 for new coin devs. If there is a flaw in your coin he seems pretty adept at finding it.

There aren't a lot of guys running around that have his level of skill doing this, because it isn't like I (or most of the others just mining) would every find flaws like this.

These are new algorithms though, so I think this is all part of the growing process that others have already gone though.

It does make it all stronger in the long run, because at least Christian lets everyone know there is a flaw.

Imagine the outrage that would happen if this went unnoticed for months and the coin was at a more successful point when this came out. People would freak out.

atc1
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 308
Merit: 250


View Profile
April 27, 2014, 03:35:12 PM
 #11499

So what improvements does v0.6 of ccminer have?

the ability to mine jackpotcoin

Which is also gone now that have hard-forked it?

nomad1109
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 238
Merit: 100


Medichain: The Medical Big-Data Platform


View Profile
April 27, 2014, 03:37:53 PM
 #11500

I also notice that Groestlcoin gets it daily jump up the profits list on CoinWarz, and that can't hurt for visibility purposes.

It just showed up as #2 in the daily profit ratings, and since you can't deactivate seeing the Groestl algo coins with the Scrypt coins, there are a lot of people mining lots of Scrypt laying eyes on this new algo for the first time.

Pages: « 1 ... 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 [575] 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 ... 1135 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!