Bitcoin Forum
December 07, 2016, 10:51:44 AM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 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 88 89 »
  Print  
Author Topic: DiabloMiner GPU Miner  (Read 803530 times)
chiropteran
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 348



View Profile WWW
January 24, 2012, 04:57:38 AM
 #1101

I've just switched to diablominer after using the simple guiminer for several months.  On this particular PC, I have a single 6970 and I have been getting around 380mhash typically with guiminer.  Somehow, with diablominer I am now getting an apparent 460mhash, and I am trying to figure out if this is for real.  It seems like too much of an increase. Is DiabloMiner really that much more efficient? Was  something wrong with my system earlier maybe?

This is with no special flags.  I tried playing around with -v and -w but found the best results came without any extra flags.

This is what I am seeing-

[1/23/12 11:51:45 PM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 122 from Cayman (#1)
[1/23/12 11:52:06 PM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 123 from Cayman (#1)
[1/23/12 11:52:25 PM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 124 from Cayman (#1)
[1/23/12 11:52:38 PM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 125 from Cayman (#1)
mhash: 463.4/462.7 | accept: 125 | reject: 0 | hw error: 0

Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481107904
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481107904

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481107904
Reply with quote  #2

1481107904
Report to moderator
1481107904
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481107904

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481107904
Reply with quote  #2

1481107904
Report to moderator
1481107904
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481107904

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481107904
Reply with quote  #2

1481107904
Report to moderator
DiabloD3
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


DiabloMiner author


View Profile WWW
January 24, 2012, 05:03:30 AM
 #1102

I've just switched to diablominer after using the simple guiminer for several months.  On this particular PC, I have a single 6970 and I have been getting around 380mhash typically with guiminer.  Somehow, with diablominer I am now getting an apparent 460mhash, and I am trying to figure out if this is for real.  It seems like too much of an increase. Is DiabloMiner really that much more efficient? Was  something wrong with my system earlier maybe?

This is with no special flags.  I tried playing around with -v and -w but found the best results came without any extra flags.

This is what I am seeing-

[1/23/12 11:51:45 PM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 122 from Cayman (#1)
[1/23/12 11:52:06 PM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 123 from Cayman (#1)
[1/23/12 11:52:25 PM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 124 from Cayman (#1)
[1/23/12 11:52:38 PM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 125 from Cayman (#1)
mhash: 463.4/462.7 | accept: 125 | reject: 0 | hw error: 0

That'd be impossible on stock clocks, I think. Either that, or my recent kernel changes have REALLY increased speed.

DiabloD3
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


DiabloMiner author


View Profile WWW
January 24, 2012, 05:10:54 AM
 #1103

Update: Fix -aa when used with -v 1

DiabloD3
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


DiabloMiner author


View Profile WWW
January 24, 2012, 05:13:23 AM
 #1104

mhash: 463.4/462.7 | accept: 125 | reject: 0 | hw error: 0

Oh, and do me a favor, and check if the release I just released changes this. I'm hoping thats not a bug, its too awesome.

chiropteran
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 348



View Profile WWW
January 24, 2012, 05:41:49 AM
 #1105

mhash: 463.4/462.7 | accept: 125 | reject: 0 | hw error: 0

Oh, and do me a favor, and check if the release I just released changes this. I'm hoping thats not a bug, its too awesome.

Yeah, I hope it's not a bug too.  Odd thing was I was getting much lower mhash at first, playing with different settings, and then got this with just defaults.

Note that it's not stock, I have the GPU clocked to 950 through CCC, but looking at the hwardware comparison page it looks like it should be around 430 mhash tops, so I don't think that fully explains it unless the hardware comparison page is just out of date.


Anyway, with the latest Diablominer, mhash didn't change too much:

[1/24/12 12:36:37 AM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 381 from Cayman (#1)
[1/24/12 12:36:41 AM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 382 from Cayman (#1)
mhash: 461.9/462.5 | accept: 382 | reject: 2 | hw error: 0^C
C:\Users\giles\Desktop\DiabloMiner>cd ..

C:\Users\giles\Desktop>cd DiabloMinerNew

C:\Users\giles\Desktop\DiabloMinerNew>DiabloMiner-Windows.exe -l http://api2.bit
coin.cz -u giles.hex1 -p ****
[1/24/12 12:37:02 AM] Started
[1/24/12 12:37:02 AM] Connecting to: http://api2.bitcoin.cz:8332/
[1/24/12 12:37:03 AM] Using AMD Accelerated Parallel Processing OpenCL 1.1 AMD-A
PP (831.4)
[1/24/12 12:37:03 AM] BFI_INT patching enabled, disabling hardware check errors
[1/24/12 12:37:03 AM] Added Cayman (#1) (24 CU, local work size of 256)
[1/24/12 12:37:12 AM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 1 from Cayman (#1)
[1/24/12 12:37:14 AM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 2 from Cayman (#1)
[1/24/12 12:37:21 AM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 3 from Cayman (#1)
[1/24/12 12:37:29 AM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 4 from Cayman (#1)
[1/24/12 12:37:36 AM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 5 from Cayman (#1)
[1/24/12 12:37:36 AM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 6 from Cayman (#1)
[1/24/12 12:37:39 AM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 7 from Cayman (#1)
[1/24/12 12:37:41 AM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 8 from Cayman (#1)
[1/24/12 12:38:06 AM] api2.bitcoin.cz rejected block 1 from Cayman (#1)
[1/24/12 12:38:19 AM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 9 from Cayman (#1)
[1/24/12 12:38:37 AM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 10 from Cayman (#1)
[1/24/12 12:38:48 AM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 11 from Cayman (#1)
[1/24/12 12:39:14 AM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 12 from Cayman (#1)
[1/24/12 12:39:18 AM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 13 from Cayman (#1)
[1/24/12 12:39:24 AM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 14 from Cayman (#1)
[1/24/12 12:39:27 AM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 15 from Cayman (#1)
[1/24/12 12:39:36 AM] api2.bitcoin.cz accepted block 16 from Cayman (#1)
mhash: 464.2/462.9 | accept: 16 | reject: 1 | hw error: 0

DiabloD3
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


DiabloMiner author


View Profile WWW
January 24, 2012, 06:49:28 AM
 #1106

mhash: 464.2/462.9 | accept: 16 | reject: 1 | hw error: 0

Tell me what mhz you're at, because its quite entirely possible to get 464, but that sounds high for stock 880mhz.

Chefnet
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 686


View Profile
January 24, 2012, 07:01:31 AM
 #1107


Note that it's not stock, I have the GPU clocked to 950 through CCC, but looking at the hwardware comparison page it looks like it should be around 430 mhash tops, so I don't think that fully explains it unless the hardware comparison page is just out of date.



:-)

DiabloD3
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


DiabloMiner author


View Profile WWW
January 24, 2012, 07:02:15 AM
 #1108


Note that it's not stock, I have the GPU clocked to 950 through CCC, but looking at the hwardware comparison page it looks like it should be around 430 mhash tops, so I don't think that fully explains it unless the hardware comparison page is just out of date.



:-)

Sorry, I'm blind. Yeah, we've been having a kernel arms war lately. What you're getting sounds in the right ballpark.

chiropteran
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 348



View Profile WWW
January 24, 2012, 02:26:08 PM
 #1109



Sorry, I'm blind. Yeah, we've been having a kernel arms war lately. What you're getting sounds in the right ballpark.

That is awesome, I'm glad I switched.  I couldn't get more than 380 with guiminer, even at 950 core.

Prattler
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 192


View Profile
January 24, 2012, 02:54:33 PM
 #1110

That is awesome, I'm glad I switched.  I couldn't get more than 380 with guiminer, even at 950 core.

Could you share your setup, please? I'm unable to reproduce this miracle of yours Smiley Only getting around 380 with Diablominer.
jjiimm_64
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1680


View Profile
January 24, 2012, 03:32:55 PM
 #1111

That is awesome, I'm glad I switched.  I couldn't get more than 380 with guiminer, even at 950 core.

Could you share your setup, please? I'm unable to reproduce this miracle of yours Smiley Only getting around 380 with Diablominer.

try with no flags....  I have a couple of 6970's and will be trying this pronto!!

1jimbitm6hAKTjKX4qurCNQubbnk2YsFw
DiabloD3
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


DiabloMiner author


View Profile WWW
January 24, 2012, 03:45:10 PM
 #1112

That is awesome, I'm glad I switched.  I couldn't get more than 380 with guiminer, even at 950 core.

Could you share your setup, please? I'm unable to reproduce this miracle of yours Smiley Only getting around 380 with Diablominer.

try with no flags....  I have a couple of 6970's and will be trying this pronto!!

Yeah, see, thats where I'm questioning this. I mean, -v 2? sure, -v 2 is fucking magic. -v 1? hell no, even 2.6's screwed up existence, where it sits at the back of my fridge begging for me to kill it, cannot do that.

CATS, DOGS, LIVING TOGETHER! OH THE HUGE MANATEE!

portron
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 106


View Profile
January 24, 2012, 04:39:33 PM
 #1113

That is awesome, I'm glad I switched.  I couldn't get more than 380 with guiminer, even at 950 core.

Could you share your setup, please? I'm unable to reproduce this miracle of yours Smiley Only getting around 380 with Diablominer.

try with no flags....  I have a couple of 6970's and will be trying this pronto!!

I tried this... can't replicate the results.... no flags latest diablominer... and I'm seeing 360m/hash - 370m/hash
chiropteran
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 348



View Profile WWW
January 25, 2012, 03:32:49 AM
 #1114

Apparently it was a false reading.  Not sure why this would cause a false mhash result, but apparently my CPU was previously set to be overclocked, not even sure how- I think it was some auto setting on a new BIOS I installed on the motherboard. Anyway, I reduced it to stock speeds with AMD Overdrive and apparently it screwed up something major with timings which led to the false mhash value and incidently broke a few other pieces of software (games).  After rebooting and setting the CPU back to completely stock speeds in the BIOS this corrected the mhash value.

Quote
and I'm seeing 360m/hash - 370m/hash

You should be able to get more, assuming you have the GPU at 950.

I'm now getting 396-399 mhash with Diablominer, which is still a nice 16-19 mhash improvement over what I was seeing in guiminer, but not crazy high anymore.

This is win7 64, 11.12 drivers, radeon 6970 (some manuf. reference design), 950mhz GPU, 1375mhz GPU RAM, 0% power increase, 65% fan to keep around 70-75C.

Roadhog2k5
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 131



View Profile
January 26, 2012, 06:52:16 AM
 #1115

7970 tweaks? Kthx.  Grin
Parja
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 36


View Profile
January 26, 2012, 04:38:53 PM
 #1116

7970 tweaks? Kthx.  Grin

Yes please!
Diapolo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 769



View Profile WWW
January 27, 2012, 03:50:30 PM
 #1117

With
Code:
-D 1 -v 1 -w 256 -aa
I get ~539 MHash/s ... this should be the preferred command line, right?
I'm currently testing other kernels for GCN performance Cheesy.

Dia

Liked my former work for Bitcoin Core? Drop me a donation via:
1PwnvixzVAKnAqp8LCV8iuv7ohzX2pbn5x
bitcoin:1PwnvixzVAKnAqp8LCV8iuv7ohzX2pbn5x?label=Diapolo
DiabloD3
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1162


DiabloMiner author


View Profile WWW
January 27, 2012, 03:52:58 PM
 #1118

With
Code:
-D 1 -v 1 -w 256 -aa
I get ~539 MHash/s ... this should be the preferred command line, right?
I'm currently testing other kernels for GCN performance Cheesy.

Dia

-D is useless unless you're turning off other cards. -w 256 is default. -v 1 is default -aa does _absolutely nothing_ and I've already renamed it to something else in a local branch.

For the first time in history, no arguments are the best. I have no clue how the hell that happened.

Diapolo
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 769



View Profile WWW
January 27, 2012, 03:59:36 PM
 #1119

With
Code:
-D 1 -v 1 -w 256 -aa
I get ~539 MHash/s ... this should be the preferred command line, right?
I'm currently testing other kernels for GCN performance Cheesy.

Dia

-D is useless unless you're turning off other cards. -w 256 is default. -v 1 is default -aa does _absolutely nothing_ and I've already renamed it to something else in a local branch.

For the first time in history, no arguments are the best. I have no clue how the hell that happened.

Well it seems the GCN architecture is pretty straightforward in terms of optimisations. You don't have to fiddle around that much with the ordering of commands and that stuff.
By the way, AMD makes the use of amd_bitalign() obsolete for rotations, so it's safe to use rotate. And it seems BFI_INT patching is not needed anymore for 7970 cards, did you observe that, too?

Dia

Liked my former work for Bitcoin Core? Drop me a donation via:
1PwnvixzVAKnAqp8LCV8iuv7ohzX2pbn5x
bitcoin:1PwnvixzVAKnAqp8LCV8iuv7ohzX2pbn5x?label=Diapolo
Parja
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 36


View Profile
January 27, 2012, 04:34:35 PM
 #1120

For the first time in history, no arguments are the best. I have no clue how the hell that happened.

Ha!
Pages: « 1 ... 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 88 89 »
  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!