Bitcoin Forum
October 22, 2017, 02:18:10 PM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.0.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 [37] 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 ... 254 »
  Print  
Author Topic: EWBF's CUDA Zcash miner  (Read 1763447 times)
anorganix
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378


Per aspera ad astra


View Profile
December 28, 2016, 07:30:55 PM
 #721

I see a lot of people using 376.09 drivers.
Is there a specific reason not to use latest drivers? I'm mining just fine with 376.33.
1508681890
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508681890

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508681890
Reply with quote  #2

1508681890
Report to moderator
1508681890
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508681890

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508681890
Reply with quote  #2

1508681890
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1508681890
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1508681890

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1508681890
Reply with quote  #2

1508681890
Report to moderator
xPwnK
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 41


View Profile
December 28, 2016, 07:35:29 PM
 #722

I see a lot of people using 376.09 drivers.
Is there a specific reason not to use latest drivers? I'm mining just fine with 376.33.
No, but there isn't reason to update your drivers either.
376.33 drivers don't increase your hashrate.
bensam1231
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 980


View Profile
December 28, 2016, 08:23:52 PM
 #723

Updating my bios's was a huge PITA all for about 8% more hashrate. When you have mixed manufacturers on one PC a lot of the update utilities don't respect models and will flash their bios over other manufacturers cards. That was a lot of fun digging up bios's to flash them back after that. Other manufacturers wont flash multiple cards (Asus update). It was a grab bag.

Best method is using nvflash and updating one of the cards with the manufacturers package, saving the updated bios with Nvflash, and then flashing all the cards at once by unplugging other models from the system.

In other news apparently you can't get that last couple % out of cards by running multiple instances anymore. EWBF still only uses 97-98% of my GPUs where as Nicehash uses 99-100%.


Worth noting, when running on Maxwell (970s) hashrate is 10% slower then Nicehash's miner. That's a pretty big difference. If you're running multiple Maxwell rigs it's better to stick with EQM.

Also .8 is still quite unstable. Multiple machines were completely stable with EQM, I have to reduce the memory clock a extra 100mhz to be stable in .8.

I buy private Nvidia miners. Send information and/or inquiries to my PM box.
m1n1ngP4d4w4n
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112

CryptoLearner


View Profile
December 28, 2016, 08:45:18 PM
 #724

I see a lot of people using 376.09 drivers.
Is there a specific reason not to use latest drivers? I'm mining just fine with 376.33.
No, but there isn't reason to update your drivers either.
376.33 drivers don't increase your hashrate.

Well with the newest pascal cards, you can always hope something will improve, but usually it'll do nothing if your previous version isn't that far from current. I recommend doing testing, and for easyness to change between version use restore point in windows, very useful Smiley

Updating my bios's was a huge PITA all for about 8% more hashrate. When you have mixed manufacturers on one PC a lot of the update utilities don't respect models and will flash their bios over other manufacturers cards. That was a lot of fun digging up bios's to flash them back after that. Other manufacturers wont flash multiple cards (Asus update). It was a grab bag.

Best method is using nvflash and updating one of the cards with the manufacturers package, saving the updated bios with Nvflash, and then flashing all the cards at once by unplugging other models from the system.

In other news apparently you can't get that last couple % out of cards by running multiple instances anymore. EWBF still only uses 97-98% of my GPUs where as Nicehash uses 99-100%.


Worth noting, when running on Maxwell (970s) hashrate is 10% slower then Nicehash's miner. That's a pretty big difference. If you're running multiple Maxwell rigs it's better to stick with EQM.

Also .8 is still quite unstable. Multiple machines were completely stable with EQM, I have to reduce the memory clock a extra 100mhz to be stable in .8.


Latest version 0.0.8b with 3 process has an average GPU usage of 99% for me. (1 bat file per 2 cards on 6 cards rigs).

Stability wise, running with no rejected shares for the last 4 hours @ average 374sols/s per card. I use the same OC i was using with EQM, so far so good Smiley

Agree with you, bios updating for heterogeneous rigs is horrible...

Code:
Wed Dec 28 20:42:21 2016      
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| NVIDIA-SMI 376.19                 Driver Version: 376.19                    |
|-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
| GPU  Name            TCC/WDDM | Bus-Id        Disp.A | Volatile Uncorr. ECC |
| Fan  Temp  Perf  Pwr:Usage/Cap|         Memory-Usage | GPU-Util  Compute M. |
|===============================+======================+======================|
|   0  GeForce GTX 1070   WDDM  | 0000:01:00.0     Off |                  N/A |
| 27%   61C    P2    85W /  92W |    636MiB /  8192MiB |     99%      Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
|   1  GeForce GTX 1070   WDDM  | 0000:02:00.0     Off |                  N/A |
| 24%   60C    P2    92W /  92W |    558MiB /  8192MiB |     99%      Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
|   2  GeForce GTX 1070   WDDM  | 0000:03:00.0     Off |                  N/A |
| 26%   60C    P2    92W /  92W |    558MiB /  8192MiB |     99%      Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
|   3  GeForce GTX 1070   WDDM  | 0000:04:00.0     Off |                  N/A |
| 27%   61C    P2    92W /  92W |    558MiB /  8192MiB |     99%      Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
|   4  GeForce GTX 1070   WDDM  | 0000:05:00.0     Off |                  N/A |
| 25%   60C    P2    94W /  92W |    558MiB /  8192MiB |     99%      Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
|   5  GeForce GTX 1070   WDDM  | 0000:06:00.0     Off |                  N/A |
| 26%   61C    P2    92W /  92W |    558MiB /  8192MiB |     99%      Default |
+-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
                                                                              
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Processes:                                                       GPU Memory |
|  GPU       PID  Type  Process name                               Usage      |
|=============================================================================|
|    0      1000  C+G   C:\Windows\System32\dwm.exe                  N/A      |
|    0      3156  C+G   C:\Windows\explorer.exe                      N/A      |
|    0      4124  C+G   ...ost_cw5n1h2txyewy\ShellExperienceHost.exe N/A      |
|    0      4340  C+G   ...indows.Cortana_cw5n1h2txyewy\SearchUI.exe N/A      |
|    0      5828    C   C:\MINING\EWBF_ZEC\miner.exe                 N/A      |
|    1      5596    C   C:\MINING\EWBF_ZEC\miner.exe                 N/A      |
|    2      5828    C   C:\MINING\EWBF_ZEC\miner.exe                 N/A      |
|    3      5776    C   C:\MINING\EWBF_ZEC\miner.exe                 N/A      |
|    4      5776    C   C:\MINING\EWBF_ZEC\miner.exe                 N/A      |
|    5      5596    C   C:\MINING\EWBF_ZEC\miner.exe                 N/A      |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+

Would love to see threading support from EWBF, as well as loggin and monitoring features for sure Wink

BTC - 1B1RBYkzxiTmrbnFe2vj8EaNPSYftW8186 for tips Wink - Please don't PM about sharing my tools, they're not for share.
petrmaje
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2


View Profile
December 28, 2016, 10:19:24 PM
 #725

Hi,
I have a issue with yours miner, Linux version.
Latest working version is 0.05b.

+---------------------------------+
| EWBF's Zcash CUDA miner. 0.0.5b |
+---------------------------------+
INFO: Target: 007fffffffffffff...
INFO: Detected new work: 1482962614_64854
INFO: Detected new work: 1482962614_64854
CUDA: Device: 0 GeForce GTX 1060 6GB, 6072 MB
INFO 23:04:01: GPU0 Accepted share 297ms [A:1, R:0]
INFO 23:04:07: GPU0 Accepted share 298ms [A:2, R:0]

Newer versions crased with this:
+---------------------------------+
| EWBF's Zcash CUDA miner. 0.0.8b |
+---------------------------------+
INFO: Target: 007fffffffffffff...
INFO: Detected new work: 1482962393_64849
INFO: Detected new work: 1482962393_64849
ERROR: Cannot run workers.

Does your miner require OPENCL files? I have installed driver without OPENCL files, because I had problems with second videocard installed in my PC. Other miners (claymore, genoil) works well. Where is the problem?
Thanks
Petr
CoffeeCat
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 39


View Profile
December 28, 2016, 11:12:02 PM
 #726

What you would folks say are the best clocks for 1070 and a 1080? I want to get the most hashing power while saving on electricity. (Electric costs are high for me.)

If your electricity costs are high, best keep @50% tdp, that's what i do, any other combo just isn't enough profitability.

for OC settings, you would probably have to do your own testing, because each card is different depending on design, makers, making and so on.

My own settings atm and im still working on them, is +135 core / +575 mem @50% tdp +20% vCore (6x EVGA FTW 1070 micron chip memory) yielding about 375sols/s each for 92w each in nvidia-smi, whole rig consuming 695w (cpu, mobo, fans, and psu efficiency in play). I also run with 3 ewbf process, 2x cards per process for maximum efficiency (i have to test with lower amount of process since ewbf made changes in 0.0.7b, to see if it's as efficient running only one or 2 process, would save a few watts, will see that this week-end)

Those are just general settings, you would have to make your own testings to find the sweetest spot Smiley

Hey, thanks for the above. That's in line with my 1070. Any thoughts on the 1080? You can bring the tdp down to 37% and I know the memory is different.
tbearhere
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162



View Profile
December 28, 2016, 11:26:15 PM
 #727

Hi everybody!

A couple of answers to your questions:
Expected speed ~360 on stock 1070 ~250 on stock 1060
Stability, miner now work with "intensity" it better utilize gpu and as result it can make strong overclock less stable.
DevFee, miner works for devfee 2% of time. But difficulty on devfee pool can be significantly lower or higher than on your pool.

It would be good, if would be intensity param, to fine tune cards.
That would be nice. I've been waiting for that for a long time.. intensity setting.

It's all a question of balance.
dtawom
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 17


View Profile
December 29, 2016, 01:39:28 AM
 #728

I tried the 0.8b on my gtx 580 rig and it detects the card unlike before where it would just say no supported card detected, now it does 0 sol/s.   Just letting you know if this release was intended to work with Cuda 2.0 devices it ain't working with 5 series cards.

Thanks,
aaronsace
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 406


View Profile
December 29, 2016, 01:59:56 AM
 #729

I would like to integrate this miner into multipoolminer for miningpoolhub as done with Claymore's miner.

An api is needed for benchmarking/monitoring. Please can you advise if you have an api to read the hashrate whilst mining? If not, would you be able to add one?

Hello? Are you able to read this? Guess what... the best miner ever created has arrived! https://github.com/aaronsace/MultiPoolMiner/releases
Icon
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 740


Seems I deinvested all my btc :(


View Profile
December 29, 2016, 03:24:10 AM
 #730

I tried the 0.8b on my gtx 580 rig and it detects the card unlike before where it would just say no supported card detected, now it does 0 sol/s.   Just letting you know if this release was intended to work with Cuda 2.0 devices it ain't working with 5 series cards.

Thanks,

Well just tried on my 650 GTX and it runs.. a massive 13 kh/s Smiley but it works Smiley

FYI this miner is as fast/faster then latest Nicehash EQM miner does uses 2 threads..

Icon
wll1rah
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 193


View Profile
December 29, 2016, 04:54:23 AM
 #731

I tried the 0.8b on my gtx 580 rig and it detects the card unlike before where it would just say no supported card detected, now it does 0 sol/s.   Just letting you know if this release was intended to work with Cuda 2.0 devices it ain't working with 5 series cards.

Thanks,

Well just tried on my 650 GTX and it runs.. a massive 13 kh/s Smiley but it works Smiley

FYI this miner is as fast/faster then latest Nicehash EQM miner does uses 2 threads..

Icon

It works but don't expect great things since he's using Cuda 8, even Maxwell runs better with cuda7.5 or 6.5.  As my GT 730 gets the same amount of hashes  as your GTX 650
m1n1ngP4d4w4n
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112

CryptoLearner


View Profile
December 29, 2016, 10:14:11 AM
 #732

What you would folks say are the best clocks for 1070 and a 1080? I want to get the most hashing power while saving on electricity. (Electric costs are high for me.)

If your electricity costs are high, best keep @50% tdp, that's what i do, any other combo just isn't enough profitability.

for OC settings, you would probably have to do your own testing, because each card is different depending on design, makers, making and so on.

My own settings atm and im still working on them, is +135 core / +575 mem @50% tdp +20% vCore (6x EVGA FTW 1070 micron chip memory) yielding about 375sols/s each for 92w each in nvidia-smi, whole rig consuming 695w (cpu, mobo, fans, and psu efficiency in play). I also run with 3 ewbf process, 2x cards per process for maximum efficiency (i have to test with lower amount of process since ewbf made changes in 0.0.7b, to see if it's as efficient running only one or 2 process, would save a few watts, will see that this week-end)

Those are just general settings, you would have to make your own testings to find the sweetest spot Smiley

Hey, thanks for the above. That's in line with my 1070. Any thoughts on the 1080? You can bring the tdp down to 37% and I know the memory is different.

I don't own any, so sadly no input Smiley, i know from what i read in the thread that it perform even better than 1070, so you should do testing Wink

BTC - 1B1RBYkzxiTmrbnFe2vj8EaNPSYftW8186 for tips Wink - Please don't PM about sharing my tools, they're not for share.
bensam1231
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 980


View Profile
December 29, 2016, 12:10:35 PM
 #733

EWBF are you interested in making more money? Cryptonote (Monero is Cryptonote) is another really big algo with a lot of volume and miners. It hasn't been improved in a really long time. Currently the public Nvidia miner is pretty mediocre. If you want to take a look at it, it's a potential for you to earn a lot more money, if you can improve it.

Not sure how much or if it can be improved, but there is very little competition there and it's definitely stagnated.

I buy private Nvidia miners. Send information and/or inquiries to my PM box.
ExEric3
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 138


View Profile
December 29, 2016, 12:12:45 PM
 #734

EWBF when you planning add coinotron?
m1n1ngP4d4w4n
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112

CryptoLearner


View Profile
December 29, 2016, 12:31:41 PM
 #735

EWBF are you interested in making more money? Cryptonote (Monero is Cryptonote) is another really big algo with a lot of volume and miners. It hasn't been improved in a really long time. Currently the public Nvidia miner is pretty mediocre. If you want to take a look at it, it's a potential for you to earn a lot more money, if you can improve it.

Not sure how much or if it can be improved, but there is very little competition there and it's definitely stagnated.

Have you tried the cuda 8 version of tsiv ccminer by KlausT ? it's far better than what basic tsiv can give you (i do 4200h XMR with 6x1070 rig but i can't max it out using 100w less @50tdp than zcash), zcash is still more interesting, but it could become a good contender when zcash drop Smiley, i agree that XMR gpu mining could/should be improved. Interesting query. I wonder why claymore isn't working more with nvidia...

EWBF when you planning add coinotron?

For my personnal knowledge what is the issue with coinotron pool, that would need special support ?

BTC - 1B1RBYkzxiTmrbnFe2vj8EaNPSYftW8186 for tips Wink - Please don't PM about sharing my tools, they're not for share.
painmaker
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 65


View Profile
December 29, 2016, 12:55:06 PM
 #736

thanks @EWBF_ for providing us with this nice piece of software!
007b was running smoothly on my linux machines on stock clock-speeds (gtx 750ti, gtx 970, gtx980) and so does 008b (alas not yet tested with the 750ti) with nvidia driver 375.20!

running multiple instances on ewbf v 008b doesn't increase my sol-rate on any of the cards but rather decreases by 5-7%, have not tried that with 007b so i cannot compare.

what kept me wondering a bit however is that my gtx 980 is not performing too well compared to my gtx 970 at the same power-levels (150W) and difficulty (64).
running 2 threads on each yields to:
gtx970@150W -> 2 * 105 sol/s == 210 sol/s -> 1.40 sol/W
gtx980@150W -> 2 * 109 sol/s == 218 sol/s -> 1.45 sol/W

of course the gtx980 runs cooler and if i set a higher power-cap it clearly beats the gtx970 in sol/s reaching
 ~257 sol/s (@230W -> 1.12 sol/W) or
 ~250 sol/s (@210W -> 1.19 sol/W) or
 ~246 sol/s (@190W -> 1.30 sol/W) or
 ~236 sol/s (@170W -> 1.39 sol/W)
but has a considerably lower efficiency (sol/W) than my gtx970. as environmental aspects are a concern for me i wonder what may be the cause for the gtx980's weak efficiency. any ideas?

my gtx970 reaches even > 1.50 sol/W when setting a power-limit < 120W and i'm quite happy with that.

that maybe has nothing to do with EWBF-miner directly but never the less might be of interest for some Wink

ps: power-cap set and power-usage read through nvidia-smi

EDIT: i have no clue how to choose ZEC-difficulty but know that typical video-card-ranges are somewhere around 64-256. can anybody give me a hint how to choose a good difficulty? i think i remember having come across some guide or article regarding this but simply cannot remember where this was and search-engines are of not much help either...
AzzAz
Hero Member
*****
Online Online

Activity: 830


View Profile
December 29, 2016, 01:23:32 PM
 #737

EWBF are you interested in making more money? Cryptonote (Monero is Cryptonote) is another really big algo with a lot of volume and miners. It hasn't been improved in a really long time. Currently the public Nvidia miner is pretty mediocre. If you want to take a look at it, it's a potential for you to earn a lot more money, if you can improve it.

Not sure how much or if it can be improved, but there is very little competition there and it's definitely stagnated.

Have you tried the cuda 8 version of tsiv ccminer by KlausT ? it's far better than what basic tsiv can give you (i do 4200h XMR with 6x1070 rig but i can't max it out using 100w less @50tdp than zcash), zcash is still more interesting, but it could become a good contender when zcash drop Smiley, i agree that XMR gpu mining could/should be improved. Interesting query. I wonder why claymore isn't working more with nvidia...

EWBF when you planning add coinotron?

For my personnal knowledge what is the issue with coinotron pool, that would need special support ?
Pools are defined in the miner. You try to setup yourself?
ZenFr
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 910


Bitcoin address 1Pjs4aP2LpwcP1nBDUq9ivyFRABQtwZ8z7


View Profile
December 29, 2016, 02:54:22 PM
 #738

EWBF are you interested in making more money? Cryptonote (Monero is Cryptonote) is another really big algo with a lot of volume and miners. It hasn't been improved in a really long time. Currently the public Nvidia miner is pretty mediocre. If you want to take a look at it, it's a potential for you to earn a lot more money, if you can improve it.

Not sure how much or if it can be improved, but there is very little competition there and it's definitely stagnated.

Have you tried the cuda 8 version of tsiv ccminer by KlausT ? it's far better than what basic tsiv can give you (i do 4200h XMR with 6x1070 rig but i can't max it out using 100w less @50tdp than zcash), zcash is still more interesting, but it could become a good contender when zcash drop Smiley, i agree that XMR gpu mining could/should be improved. Interesting query. I wonder why claymore isn't working more with nvidia...
Good idea but unfornately TSIV CCminer don't support cryptonote/XMR algo :-(.

Edit : so, there is an old version of TSIV CCMiner specific to cryptonote, I'll refound it...

Edit 2 : I refund the github repository of specific TSIV specific Cryptonote CCMiner : no news sinc 3 years...
Where have you seen a cuda 8 version ?

       ▄▄▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▄▄
    ▄█▀ ▄▄███████▄▄ ▀█▄
  ▄█▀ ▄█████████████▄ ▀▄▄
 ▄▀ ▄█████    ████████▄ ▀▄
▄█ ███████    ██████████ █▄
█ ▄█████▀▀   █▀    ▄████▄ █
█ ██████▄    ▀   ▄███████ █
█ ▀████         ▄███████▀ █
▀█ █████    █    ▀██████ █▀
 ▀▄ ▀██    ███    ▀███▀ ▄▀
  ▀█▄ ▀█████████████▀ ▄█▀
    ▀█▄ ▀▀███████▀▀ ▄█▀
       ▀▀▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▄▀▀
kickcity     ▄█▄           ▄█▄
▄███ ███ █████████ ███ ███▄
████▄ ▄█████████▄ ▄████
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀

███████████████████████████
██                       ██
██      ███ ███ ███ ███  ██
██                       ██
██  ███ ███ ███ ███ ███  ██
██                       ██
██  ███ ███ ███ ███      ██
██                       ██
▀█████████████████████████▀
         ▀   ▀▄  ▄  ▄▀
   ▀    ▄   ▀  ▀▄ ▄▀  ▀
     ▀
█  ▀  ▀▀▄ ▄▀▀▀▀▀▀
  ▀▄  ▀    ▄▀▀▀   ▄   ▀
   ▀ ▀▀  ▀  ▀  ▄
▀▀▀▀  ▀▄  ▀   ▄▀  █ ▀  ▀
   █   ▀▄  ▀ █      ▀
 ▀   █ ▀  █  █  ▀
   ▀
        █
        ▀ 
           
           
           
............WHITEPAPER............
▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀▀
facebook   slack   VK   twitter   telegram
.
|
.
|
Kompik
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 322


View Profile
December 29, 2016, 03:55:32 PM
 #739

EWBF are you interested in making more money? Cryptonote (Monero is Cryptonote) is another really big algo with a lot of volume and miners. It hasn't been improved in a really long time. Currently the public Nvidia miner is pretty mediocre. If you want to take a look at it, it's a potential for you to earn a lot more money, if you can improve it.

Not sure how much or if it can be improved, but there is very little competition there and it's definitely stagnated.

Have you tried the cuda 8 version of tsiv ccminer by KlausT ? it's far better than what basic tsiv can give you (i do 4200h XMR with 6x1070 rig but i can't max it out using 100w less @50tdp than zcash), zcash is still more interesting, but it could become a good contender when zcash drop Smiley, i agree that XMR gpu mining could/should be improved. Interesting query. I wonder why claymore isn't working more with nvidia...
Good idea but unfornately TSIV CCminer don't support cryptonote/XMR algo :-(.

Edit : so, there is an old version of TSIV CCMiner specific to cryptonote, I'll refound it...

Edit 2 : I refund the github repository of specific TSIV specific Cryptonote CCMiner : no news sinc 3 years...
Where have you seen a cuda 8 version ?

I agree please make also XMR miner for nVidia! Smiley I do not believe that a 1070 can only do 700 at the moment Smiley
m1n1ngP4d4w4n
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 112

CryptoLearner


View Profile
December 29, 2016, 03:55:39 PM
 #740

EWBF are you interested in making more money? Cryptonote (Monero is Cryptonote) is another really big algo with a lot of volume and miners. It hasn't been improved in a really long time. Currently the public Nvidia miner is pretty mediocre. If you want to take a look at it, it's a potential for you to earn a lot more money, if you can improve it.

Not sure how much or if it can be improved, but there is very little competition there and it's definitely stagnated.

Have you tried the cuda 8 version of tsiv ccminer by KlausT ? it's far better than what basic tsiv can give you (i do 4200h XMR with 6x1070 rig but i can't max it out using 100w less @50tdp than zcash), zcash is still more interesting, but it could become a good contender when zcash drop Smiley, i agree that XMR gpu mining could/should be improved. Interesting query. I wonder why claymore isn't working more with nvidia...
Good idea but unfornately TSIV CCminer don't support cryptonote/XMR algo :-(.

Edit : so, there is an old version of TSIV CCMiner specific to cryptonote, I'll refound it...

Edit 2 : I refund the github repository of specific TSIV specific Cryptonote CCMiner : no news sinc 3 years...
Where have you seen a cuda 8 version ?

https://github.com/KlausT/ccminer-cryptonight/releases

There you go, friend Smiley

thanks @EWBF_ for providing us with this nice piece of software!
007b was running smoothly on my linux machines on stock clock-speeds (gtx 750ti, gtx 970, gtx980) and so does 008b (alas not yet tested with the 750ti) with nvidia driver 375.20!

running multiple instances on ewbf v 008b doesn't increase my sol-rate on any of the cards but rather decreases by 5-7%, have not tried that with 007b so i cannot compare.

what kept me wondering a bit however is that my gtx 980 is not performing too well compared to my gtx 970 at the same power-levels (150W) and difficulty (64).
running 2 threads on each yields to:
gtx970@150W -> 2 * 105 sol/s == 210 sol/s -> 1.40 sol/W
gtx980@150W -> 2 * 109 sol/s == 218 sol/s -> 1.45 sol/W

of course the gtx980 runs cooler and if i set a higher power-cap it clearly beats the gtx970 in sol/s reaching
 ~257 sol/s (@230W -> 1.12 sol/W) or
 ~250 sol/s (@210W -> 1.19 sol/W) or
 ~246 sol/s (@190W -> 1.30 sol/W) or
 ~236 sol/s (@170W -> 1.39 sol/W)
but has a considerably lower efficiency (sol/W) than my gtx970. as environmental aspects are a concern for me i wonder what may be the cause for the gtx980's weak efficiency. any ideas?

my gtx970 reaches even > 1.50 sol/W when setting a power-limit < 120W and i'm quite happy with that.

that maybe has nothing to do with EWBF-miner directly but never the less might be of interest for some Wink

ps: power-cap set and power-usage read through nvidia-smi

EDIT: i have no clue how to choose ZEC-difficulty but know that typical video-card-ranges are somewhere around 64-256. can anybody give me a hint how to choose a good difficulty? i think i remember having come across some guide or article regarding this but simply cannot remember where this was and search-engines are of not much help either...

Usually pools adjust difficulty against your hashing power. Some pools allow you to choose it like flypool. A little guideline taken from zcash page on dwarfpool

128 for one videocard
512  for rigs with 2-4 cards
1024 for rigs with >=5 cards

cheers Smiley

BTC - 1B1RBYkzxiTmrbnFe2vj8EaNPSYftW8186 for tips Wink - Please don't PM about sharing my tools, they're not for share.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 [37] 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 ... 254 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!