Syke
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 3878
Merit: 1193
|
|
February 04, 2011, 06:49:45 AM |
|
With '-f 1' after a few hours it's definitely settled in for a nice hash rate. It swings maybe +/- 5%. Quite acceptable.
|
Buy & Hold
|
|
|
sturle
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1437
Merit: 1002
https://bitmynt.no
|
|
February 04, 2011, 08:36:07 AM |
|
Art's miner is great, but not without disadvantages. At -f 30 it is significantly slower than the original miner. At -f 2 it is faster, but the desktop is useless for interactive work. Could we have an option to use the old miner? Perhaps even an option where DiabloMiner switches miner when it has to slow down due to desktop activity, and changes back to Art's miner with -f 1 when the screensaver is on?
|
Sjå https://bitmynt.no for veksling av bitcoin mot norske kroner. Trygt, billig, raskt og enkelt sidan 2010. I buy with EUR and other currencies at a fair market price when you want to sell. See http://bitmynt.no/eurprice.plWarning: "Bitcoin" XT, Classic, Unlimited and the likes are scams. Don't use them, and don't listen to their shills.
|
|
|
DiabloD3 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
DiabloMiner author
|
|
February 04, 2011, 08:59:43 AM |
|
Update: Changed to 15 sec avg/forever double meter, further decreased run size floor, allow very maximum nonce before saturation flush
|
|
|
|
DiabloD3 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
DiabloMiner author
|
|
February 04, 2011, 09:05:21 AM |
|
Art's miner is great, but not without disadvantages. At -f 30 it is significantly slower than the original miner. At -f 2 it is faster, but the desktop is useless for interactive work. Could we have an option to use the old miner? Perhaps even an option where DiabloMiner switches miner when it has to slow down due to desktop activity, and changes back to Art's miner with -f 1 when the screensaver is on?
Its just a kernel switch. The kernel does not have control over what you describe, so what you describe is impossible.... if Art's miner performs badly, it will perform badly no matter the -f setting. Art's kernel DOES drive the hardware (3%) harder, so it MAY require a larger -f number to keep the same desktop interactivity, but thats about it. Also, if you are using 11.1, don't. Also, -f 30 sounds rather low for keeping your desktop interactive.
|
|
|
|
sturle
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1437
Merit: 1002
https://bitmynt.no
|
|
February 04, 2011, 09:44:26 AM |
|
Art's miner is great, but not without disadvantages. At -f 30 it is significantly slower than the original miner. At -f 2 it is faster, but the desktop is useless for interactive work. Could we have an option to use the old miner? Perhaps even an option where DiabloMiner switches miner when it has to slow down due to desktop activity, and changes back to Art's miner with -f 1 when the screensaver is on?
Its just a kernel switch. The kernel does not have control over what you describe, so what you describe is impossible.... if Art's miner performs badly, it will perform badly no matter the -f setting. Not according to Art (from IRC): 23:48 < ArtForz> my kernel usually likes -w 64 or 128 and really low -f 23:48 < ArtForz> I'm running the equivalent of -f 2 her Also, if you are using 11.1, don't. Also, -f 30 sounds rather low for keeping your desktop interactive.
I use 10.12 It works for me. And -f 30 was good enough for me with the previous kernel, and gave a decent hashrate while keeping interactivity. Art's kernel is not good at this setting, according to ArtForz.
|
Sjå https://bitmynt.no for veksling av bitcoin mot norske kroner. Trygt, billig, raskt og enkelt sidan 2010. I buy with EUR and other currencies at a fair market price when you want to sell. See http://bitmynt.no/eurprice.plWarning: "Bitcoin" XT, Classic, Unlimited and the likes are scams. Don't use them, and don't listen to their shills.
|
|
|
DiabloD3 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
DiabloMiner author
|
|
February 04, 2011, 10:01:51 AM |
|
Except thats not what he said at all. m0's kernel ALSO runs best at -w 64 and low -f settings. -f controls kernel execution length; ANY kernel will run better with lower -f settings because there is far less time wasted on kernel setup overhead.
10.12 may or may not cause issues for some people. Downgrading to 10.11 should fix them for the few people that have them.
|
|
|
|
DiabloD3 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
DiabloMiner author
|
|
February 04, 2011, 09:29:03 PM |
|
Update: Use multiple buckets on output to reduce lost pool shares
Roughly 3.5% of shares are lost (due to bucket cramming) on a 5870 on -f 1... its far less for slower cards or high -f values. It is now 256 times less. I can live with 0.02% lost.
|
|
|
|
DiabloD3 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
DiabloMiner author
|
|
February 05, 2011, 01:01:57 PM |
|
Update: Fix bug on Radeon 5xxx looping
|
|
|
|
Cdecker
|
|
February 05, 2011, 01:34:05 PM |
|
Update: Fix bug on Radeon 5xxx looping
Does this justify a 3% performance increase? I'm not sure how precise the hash meter is.
|
|
|
|
DiabloD3 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
DiabloMiner author
|
|
February 05, 2011, 01:45:20 PM |
|
Update: Fix bug on Radeon 5xxx looping
Does this justify a 3% performance increase? I'm not sure how precise the hash meter is. Looping doesn't cause the 3% performance boost if thats what you're asking. I see it on my 4xxx, and looping isn't enabled on 4xxx. Looping is probably another, eh, half a percent or so.
|
|
|
|
Cdecker
|
|
February 05, 2011, 02:13:35 PM |
|
Looping doesn't cause the 3% performance boost if thats what you're asking. I see it on my 4xxx, and looping isn't enabled on 4xxx. Looping is probably another, eh, half a percent or so. My bad, the meter is fluctuating a bit more, I'll check if it stabilizes.
|
|
|
|
DiabloD3 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
DiabloMiner author
|
|
February 05, 2011, 02:48:11 PM |
|
Looping doesn't cause the 3% performance boost if thats what you're asking. I see it on my 4xxx, and looping isn't enabled on 4xxx. Looping is probably another, eh, half a percent or so. My bad, the meter is fluctuating a bit more, I'll check if it stabilizes. The first meter measures whats going on now, the second meter measures the performance since the start of the miner. If you intend on benchmarking, do -f 1 and read the second meter after 15 minutes.
|
|
|
|
gusti
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1099
Merit: 1000
|
|
February 06, 2011, 01:06:55 AM |
|
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.UnsatisfiedLinkError: /home/humble/warez/DiabloMiner/target/libs/natives/linux/liblwjgl.so: /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-sun-1.6.0.22/jre/lib/i386/libjawt.so: symbol awt_FreeDrawingSurface, version SUNWprivate_1.1 not defined in file libmawt.so with link time reference at java.lang.ClassLoader$NativeLibrary.load(Native Method) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadLibrary0(ClassLoader.java:1803) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadLibrary(ClassLoader.java:1728) at java.lang.Runtime.loadLibrary0(Runtime.java:823) at java.lang.System.loadLibrary(System.java:1028)
Anybody found an always effective workaround for this problem ? I'm finding it hard to fix it, though only certain machines have the issue Display already set to :0. Will using openjdk-6-jre-headless solve it ? Using FC14 at this time, thinking on switching to Ubuntu, not sure if that will help.
|
If you don't own the private keys, you don't own the coins.
|
|
|
DiabloD3 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
DiabloMiner author
|
|
February 06, 2011, 09:53:13 AM |
|
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.UnsatisfiedLinkError: /home/humble/warez/DiabloMiner/target/libs/natives/linux/liblwjgl.so: /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-sun-1.6.0.22/jre/lib/i386/libjawt.so: symbol awt_FreeDrawingSurface, version SUNWprivate_1.1 not defined in file libmawt.so with link time reference at java.lang.ClassLoader$NativeLibrary.load(Native Method) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadLibrary0(ClassLoader.java:1803) at java.lang.ClassLoader.loadLibrary(ClassLoader.java:1728) at java.lang.Runtime.loadLibrary0(Runtime.java:823) at java.lang.System.loadLibrary(System.java:1028)
Anybody found an always effective workaround for this problem ? I'm finding it hard to fix it, though only certain machines have the issue Display already set to :0. Will using openjdk-6-jre-headless solve it ? Using FC14 at this time, thinking on switching to Ubuntu, not sure if that will help. The only way to get that issue is if you don't have X running. Just setting DISPLAY isn't enough and using headless makes it worse. This is an unfortunate bug in Java triggered by how LWJGL works; it shouldn't happen. On ATI you need X running anyhow, on Nvidia you can run a dummy X (such as xvfb).
|
|
|
|
djinfected
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 24
Merit: 0
|
|
February 10, 2011, 03:54:39 PM Last edit: February 10, 2011, 05:43:22 PM by djinfected |
|
Just want to say thanks for the info in this thread, I got it working and even have figured out how to have a few different batch files for different levels of hashing (-w 32 -f 1000 versus -w 512 -f 1)
Just want to report that I have a 9600 GT 1GB from MSI on Windows 7 x64, and if I increase the -w flag it goes up for each interval. At 32 I'm getting like 8600k but at 512 I get almost 15000k.
Good work on this one, it's quite an improvement over my CPU's 4000k (and I've got an AMD quad!).
oh, one thing. I noticed some talk about -v flags but the program doesn't recognize any. I assume they were simply removed from implementation?
|
|
|
|
DiabloD3 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
DiabloMiner author
|
|
February 10, 2011, 04:24:02 PM |
|
Just want to say thanks for the info in this thread, I got it working and even have figured out how to have a few different batch files for different levels of hashing (-w 32 -f 1000 versus -w 512 -f 1)
Just want to report that I have a 9600 GT 1GB from MSI on Windows 7 x64, and if I increase the -w flag it goes up for each interval. At 32 I'm getting like 8600k but at 512 I get almost 150k.
Good work on this one, it's quite an improvement over my CPU's 4k (and I've got an AMD quad!).
oh, one thing. I noticed some talk about -v flags but the program doesn't recognize any. I assume they were simply removed from implementation?
Nvidia handles -w weird. Some cards have a minimum of 32, some have 64, and there is no way to query this and there doesn't seem to be a list out there. If -w 32 is extremely slow, don't use it. And yes, -v has been removed. It doesn't increase speed on properly functioning OpenCL compilers.
|
|
|
|
djinfected
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 24
Merit: 0
|
|
February 10, 2011, 04:41:50 PM Last edit: February 10, 2011, 05:07:24 PM by djinfected |
|
Just want to say thanks for the info in this thread, I got it working and even have figured out how to have a few different batch files for different levels of hashing (-w 32 -f 1000 versus -w 512 -f 1)
Just want to report that I have a 9600 GT 1GB from MSI on Windows 7 x64, and if I increase the -w flag it goes up for each interval. At 32 I'm getting like 8600k but at 512 I get almost 150k.
Good work on this one, it's quite an improvement over my CPU's 4k (and I've got an AMD quad!).
oh, one thing. I noticed some talk about -v flags but the program doesn't recognize any. I assume they were simply removed from implementation?
Nvidia handles -w weird. Some cards have a minimum of 32, some have 64, and there is no way to query this and there doesn't seem to be a list out there. If -w 32 is extremely slow, don't use it. And yes, -v has been removed. It doesn't increase speed on properly functioning OpenCL compilers. Ah, thanks for the protips. The difference between 32 and 64 is between 8600k and 13500k! (Compared to 15000k for 512, pardon the typo in my above post.) Also, when I get messages like Block 1 found, Block 2 found, does that mean I generated a block...? edit: it looks like this. [2/10/11 11:52:36 AM] Block 1 found on GeForce 9600 GT (#1)
|
|
|
|
DiabloD3 (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1000
DiabloMiner author
|
|
February 12, 2011, 04:43:34 AM |
|
Also, when I get messages like Block 1 found, Block 2 found, does that mean I generated a block...?
edit: it looks like this. [2/10/11 11:52:36 AM] Block 1 found on GeForce 9600 GT (#1)
Yup, unless you're on a pool, then thats a pool share.
|
|
|
|
pmw
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 5
Merit: 0
|
|
February 12, 2011, 07:43:52 AM |
|
DiabloD3, thank you for the great miner. It works out of the box on my 64-bit Windows 7 machine with a Radeon HD 6800 card. I am getting about 13.5 mhash/s -- and I can continue to run four threads of CPU miner without any noticeable effect on the GPU miner. Life is great.
The only problem is -- the GPU miner crashes after a few minutes of running. Windows informs me that Java has crashed. I am running the 64-bit JRE 1.6.0.23. The choice of worksize seems to have no effect. So far your GPU miner hasn't been able to run more than about 10 minutes. Windows itself remains stable; I can simply restart the GPU miner.
I'd love to get you a stack trace or something, but I don't see how. Any thoughts on this?
|
|
|
|
tryptamine
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 24
Merit: 0
|
|
February 12, 2011, 09:23:56 AM |
|
In the last version the meter shows this: I usually got 110000-140000, is this normal?
|
|
|
|
|