DiabloMiner GPU Miner

[DiabloD3]

Update: Everyone effected by the problem, try the new build.

The new build works well, thanks! What was the issue?

Side note: I can now use a worksize of either 128 or 256 on OS X 10.7.4 and notice a small increase in hashrate over -w 64. May be worth mentioning in the OP instructions. I assume it's because of (one of?) the OpenCL updates Apple has pushed out.

FINALLY THEY FIXED IT! HOLY CRAP APPLE, IT ONLY TOOK TWO YEARS!

Also, the issue on AMD was AMD interprets the specification differently than I do. It costs basically nothing to fix it, and on GCN its measurably nothing.

[1714047769]

1714047769

[Xian01]

Apologies if this has been answered before, but I could not find an answer to my question on Google.

Is there a way for me to set a lower aggression for DiabloMiner ? I thought setting the -f flag to some high value might help, but not getting the desired result.

[DiabloD3]

Apologies if this has been answered before, but I could not find an answer to my question on Google.

Is there a way for me to set a lower aggression for DiabloMiner ? I thought setting the -f flag to some high value might help, but not getting the desired result.

-f is fps. Set it to a multiple or divisor of 60. Higher is less aggressive.

[Xian01]

Apologies if this has been answered before, but I could not find an answer to my question on Google.

Is there a way for me to set a lower aggression for DiabloMiner ? I thought setting the -f flag to some high value might help, but not getting the desired result.

-f is fps. Set it to a multiple or divisor of 60. Higher is less aggressive.

That's what I thought Very strange. On a multi-card setup, I've tried -f 1, 60, 600, 6000, 60000 and it's seemed to make no discernible difference in affecting hashrate I'll try snagging the latest-and-greatest DiabloMiner later this evening if see what's what.

 Thanks !

[DiabloD3]

Apologies if this has been answered before, but I could not find an answer to my question on Google.

Is there a way for me to set a lower aggression for DiabloMiner ? I thought setting the -f flag to some high value might help, but not getting the desired result.

-f is fps. Set it to a multiple or divisor of 60. Higher is less aggressive.

That's what I thought Very strange. On a multi-card setup, I've tried -f 1, 60, 600, 6000, 60000 and it's seemed to make no discernible difference in affecting hashrate I'll try snagging the latest-and-greatest DiabloMiner later this evening if see what's what.

 Thanks !

It doesnt effect the hashrate much, it effects the aggression. Only in badly designed miners that it greatly effects the hashrate.

On my 7979 at stock speeds -f 1000 gets me about 512. At the default of -f 30 it gets me about 556. I assume the difference is much larger in Windows.

[PawShaker]

I used to mine with phoenix on Eligius. The hash rate reported by both of them did agree (in average). Now I am trying Diablo. This miner reports much higher hash rate (by 15%). However, Eligius reports only 53% of the hash rate reported by Diablo. When I count shares/blocks submitted in last 15 minutes it actually does roughly match. So it seems that despite apparent higher hash rate less shares/blocks are submitted to the pool.

I got Diablo from binary zip archive from link at the very front of this topic. It seems to be quite up to date. Timestamp on DiabloMiner.jar in archive is May 23. So it is recent version.

I was searching this forum and googled it. However, I am still in the dark abyss (and Diablo is lurking somewhere around ...) Does what I described ring a bell?

[DiabloD3]

I used to mine with phoenix on Eligius. The hash rate reported by both of them did agree (in average). Now I am trying Diablo. This miner reports much higher hash rate (by 15%). However, Eligius reports only 53% of the hash rate reported by Diablo. When I count shares/blocks submitted in last 15 minutes it actually does roughly match. So it seems that despite apparent higher hash rate less shares/blocks are submitted to the pool.

I got Diablo from binary zip archive from link at the very front of this topic. It seems to be quite up to date. Timestamp on DiabloMiner.jar in archive is May 23. So it is recent version.

I was searching this forum and googled it. However, I am still in the dark abyss (and Diablo is lurking somewhere around ...) Does what I described ring a bell?

Never use the pool hash rate. It is trying to count using an random event (share finding). Eligius comes close on the 3hr meter, but its still usually ~5-10% +/- off

[PawShaker]

I used to mine with phoenix on Eligius. The hash rate reported by both of them did agree (in average). Now I am trying Diablo. This miner reports much higher hash rate (by 15%). However, Eligius reports only 53% of the hash rate reported by Diablo. When I count shares/blocks submitted in last 15 minutes it actually does roughly match. So it seems that despite apparent higher hash rate less shares/blocks are submitted to the pool.

I got Diablo from binary zip archive from link at the very front of this topic. It seems to be quite up to date. Timestamp on DiabloMiner.jar in archive is May 23. So it is recent version.

I was searching this forum and googled it. However, I am still in the dark abyss (and Diablo is lurking somewhere around ...) Does what I described ring a bell?

Never use the pool hash rate. It is trying to count using an random event (share finding). Eligius comes close on the 3hr meter, but its still usually ~5-10% +/- off

As I said it agrees in average. It is +- 10% but not 47%. Now I am testing cgminer and pool reported average is consistent with what miner displaies. As I wrote, I checked number of accepted shares and what pool was reporting (60 per 15 min) was in agreement with what miner reported (when I checked it was 51 shares in previous 15 min). Now with cgminer I am averaging 124 shares per 15 min.

I will try DiabloMiner again. I am puzzled by what has happened.

[DiabloD3]

I used to mine with phoenix on Eligius. The hash rate reported by both of them did agree (in average). Now I am trying Diablo. This miner reports much higher hash rate (by 15%). However, Eligius reports only 53% of the hash rate reported by Diablo. When I count shares/blocks submitted in last 15 minutes it actually does roughly match. So it seems that despite apparent higher hash rate less shares/blocks are submitted to the pool.

I got Diablo from binary zip archive from link at the very front of this topic. It seems to be quite up to date. Timestamp on DiabloMiner.jar in archive is May 23. So it is recent version.

I was searching this forum and googled it. However, I am still in the dark abyss (and Diablo is lurking somewhere around ...) Does what I described ring a bell?

Never use the pool hash rate. It is trying to count using an random event (share finding). Eligius comes close on the 3hr meter, but its still usually ~5-10% +/- off

As I said it agrees in average. It is +- 10% but not 47%. Now I am testing cgminer and pool reported average is consistent with what miner displaies. As I wrote, I checked number of accepted shares and what pool was reporting (60 per 15 min) was in agreement with what miner reported (when I checked it was 51 shares in previous 15 min). Now with cgminer I am averaging 124 shares per 15 min.

I will try DiabloMiner again. I am puzzled by what has happened.

If you think DM is not producing shares correctly, start DM with -d and count the number of attempts (NOT accepts), you should get roughly 10000 attempts every 43000 ghash.

[earthsound]

Update: Everyone effected by the problem, try the new build.

The new build works well, thanks! What was the issue?

Side note: I can now use a worksize of either 128 or 256 on OS X 10.7.4 and notice a small increase in hashrate over -w 64. May be worth mentioning in the OP instructions. I assume it's because of (one of?) the OpenCL updates Apple has pushed out.

FINALLY THEY FIXED IT! HOLY CRAP APPLE, IT ONLY TOOK TWO YEARS!

Also, the issue on AMD was AMD interprets the specification differently than I do. It costs basically nothing to fix it, and on GCN its measurably nothing.

Well, I spoke too soon. After letting a few boxes run over the weekend with the latest version, the clients report that they are connecting to the pool and shares are accepted, however the hashrate as reported by the pool is much lower with this latest version than the one in March.

The new client was showing an average 34 mhash/s per machine all weekend (looking at Eligius' 3 hr avg & 12 hr avg) vs. 67 mhash/s on the March client (looking at Eligius' 3 hours avg today).

I can confirm that just upgrading to 10.7.4 cause an approximate drop of 8-10 mhash/s. 

[DiabloD3]

Update: Everyone effected by the problem, try the new build.

The new build works well, thanks! What was the issue?

Side note: I can now use a worksize of either 128 or 256 on OS X 10.7.4 and notice a small increase in hashrate over -w 64. May be worth mentioning in the OP instructions. I assume it's because of (one of?) the OpenCL updates Apple has pushed out.

FINALLY THEY FIXED IT! HOLY CRAP APPLE, IT ONLY TOOK TWO YEARS!

Also, the issue on AMD was AMD interprets the specification differently than I do. It costs basically nothing to fix it, and on GCN its measurably nothing.

Well, I spoke too soon. After letting a few boxes run over the weekend with the latest version, the clients report that they are connecting to the pool and shares are accepted, however the hashrate as reported by the pool is much lower with this latest version than the one in March.

The new client was showing an average 34 mhash/s per machine all weekend (looking at Eligius' 3 hr avg & 12 hr avg) vs. 67 mhash/s on the March client (looking at Eligius' 3 hours avg today).

I can confirm that just upgrading to 10.7.4 cause an approximate drop of 8-10 mhash/s. 

Goddamnit Apple. Why do you hate OpenCL so much.

[-ck]

I can confirm that just upgrading to 10.7.4 cause an approximate drop of 8-10 mhash/s. 

Goddamnit Apple. Why do you hate OpenCL so much.

Apple got the rejected coders that AMD wouldn't employ as ATI driver developers.

[Shadow383]

Apologies if this has been answered before, but I could not find an answer to my question on Google.

Is there a way for me to set a lower aggression for DiabloMiner ? I thought setting the -f flag to some high value might help, but not getting the desired result.

-f is fps. Set it to a multiple or divisor of 60. Higher is less aggressive.

That's what I thought Very strange. On a multi-card setup, I've tried -f 1, 60, 600, 6000, 60000 and it's seemed to make no discernible difference in affecting hashrate I'll try snagging the latest-and-greatest DiabloMiner later this evening if see what's what.

 Thanks !

It doesnt effect the hashrate much, it effects the aggression. Only in badly designed miners that it greatly effects the hashrate.

On my 7979 at stock speeds -f 1000 gets me about 512. At the default of -f 30 it gets me about 556. I assume the difference is much larger in Windows.

So if I set it to -f 60, I can game at 60fps whilst using whatever GPU horsepower is going spare? 

[DiabloD3]

Apologies if this has been answered before, but I could not find an answer to my question on Google.

Is there a way for me to set a lower aggression for DiabloMiner ? I thought setting the -f flag to some high value might help, but not getting the desired result.

-f is fps. Set it to a multiple or divisor of 60. Higher is less aggressive.

That's what I thought Very strange. On a multi-card setup, I've tried -f 1, 60, 600, 6000, 60000 and it's seemed to make no discernible difference in affecting hashrate I'll try snagging the latest-and-greatest DiabloMiner later this evening if see what's what.

 Thanks !

It doesnt effect the hashrate much, it effects the aggression. Only in badly designed miners that it greatly effects the hashrate.

On my 7979 at stock speeds -f 1000 gets me about 512. At the default of -f 30 it gets me about 556. I assume the difference is much larger in Windows.

So if I set it to -f 60, I can game at 60fps whilst using whatever GPU horsepower is going spare? 

Depends entirely on the game, but unlikely. Try -f 120 or -f 180 or -f 240.

[DiabloD3]

Update: Hardened the JSON parser a little more

[neo_rage]

I used to mine with phoenix on Eligius. The hash rate reported by both of them did agree (in average). Now I am trying Diablo. This miner reports much higher hash rate (by 15%). However, Eligius reports only 53% of the hash rate reported by Diablo. When I count shares/blocks submitted in last 15 minutes it actually does roughly match. So it seems that despite apparent higher hash rate less shares/blocks are submitted to the pool.

I got Diablo from binary zip archive from link at the very front of this topic. It seems to be quite up to date. Timestamp on DiabloMiner.jar in archive is May 23. So it is recent version.

I was searching this forum and googled it. However, I am still in the dark abyss (and Diablo is lurking somewhere around ...) Does what I described ring a bell?

I have the same trouble on a 5970. DiabloMiner shows 740 mhash/s, and the pool (triplemining) displays only 367 mhash/s. I tested it around 12 hours, and nothing changed. That's occurs when I upgraded to the last version using the link in the first post.

[DiabloD3]

I used to mine with phoenix on Eligius. The hash rate reported by both of them did agree (in average). Now I am trying Diablo. This miner reports much higher hash rate (by 15%). However, Eligius reports only 53% of the hash rate reported by Diablo. When I count shares/blocks submitted in last 15 minutes it actually does roughly match. So it seems that despite apparent higher hash rate less shares/blocks are submitted to the pool.

I got Diablo from binary zip archive from link at the very front of this topic. It seems to be quite up to date. Timestamp on DiabloMiner.jar in archive is May 23. So it is recent version.

I was searching this forum and googled it. However, I am still in the dark abyss (and Diablo is lurking somewhere around ...) Does what I described ring a bell?

I have the same trouble on a 5970. DiabloMiner shows 740 mhash/s, and the pool (triplemining) displays only 367 mhash/s. I tested it around 12 hours, and nothing changed. That's occurs when I upgraded to the last version using the link in the first post.

That should have already been fixed. Make sure you're on the absolute newest version.

[neo_rage]

I downloaded DiabloMiner using the link http://adterrasperaspera.com/images/DiabloMiner.zip
If it is a wrong link, please tell me correct.

[DiabloD3]

I downloaded DiabloMiner using the link http://adterrasperaspera.com/images/DiabloMiner.zip
If it is a wrong link, please tell me correct.

Its the right link, but it is updated periodically. I last updated it June 13th.

[neo_rage]

I downloaded it yesterday, and after that I had the same trouble at first time.