Bitcoin Forum
November 19, 2018, 08:39:35 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.0 [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 [162] 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN] dstm's ZCash / Equihash Nvidia Miner v0.6.2 (Linux / Windows)  (Read 219710 times)
HashAuger
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 266
Merit: 0


View Profile WWW
May 16, 2018, 07:03:05 PM
 #3221

New Version 0.6.1
- support configuration of 'temp-target', 'intensity', 'pool' via cmd-line parameters

DSTM, thanks for the new version.  I haven't had any issues with latency on MiningPoolHub, ZPool or NiceHash using Windows 10. However, I do have a quick question regarding latency.  Is 1.0  the default value?  Based on my limited testing, I am assuming it is as any lower value reduces the hash rate, but I would like a quick confirmation of that. Thanks.
1542616775
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1542616775

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1542616775
Reply with quote  #2

1542616775
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
wi7chking
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 16, 2018, 07:31:15 PM
 #3222

For people having performance issues on 0.6.1/linux.
Is there a significant CPU-load difference between 0.6 / 0.6.1 on your systems?

Hi DSTM,

I noticed quite a difference in CPU usage between 0.6.0 and 0.6.1 running on vanilla Debian 9.4 (Stretch).
Here it goes: https://imgur.com/a/lNtcqlC

I measured the CPU usages with top over a period of time (around 1 minute or so) and took the average.
The behaviour of 0.6.1 running on my miner is that the last GPU (GPU4) is running at 75% of its capacity.
This rig has 4 GTX 1070 and 1 GTX 1080.  One of the 1070s is GPU4.
That's quite odd (considering the high CPU usage of kworker and some IRQs as well with 0.6.1).
GPU Overclock, memory clock, power limit have been kept identical in the two runs (0.6.0 vs 0.6.1).
The only actual difference is zm executable version.

Hope it helps.  Meanwhile, I reverted to 0.6.0 that uses less CPU and provides a higher combined hashrate on my rig.

Thanks for your good work! Cheers!
dstm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 126


View Profile
May 16, 2018, 08:00:34 PM
 #3223

New Version 0.6.1
- support configuration of 'temp-target', 'intensity', 'pool' via cmd-line parameters

DSTM, thanks for the new version.  I haven't had any issues with latency on MiningPoolHub, ZPool or NiceHash using Windows 10. However, I do have a quick question regarding latency.  Is 1.0  the default value?  Based on my limited testing, I am assuming it is as any lower value reduces the hash rate, but I would like a quick confirmation of that. Thanks.

I guess you're talking about intensity not latency like you wrote.
Intensity is only used to reduce the GPU load - if you don't set the '--intensity' option the intensity code path isn't used and zm will run as fast as possible.
dstm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 126


View Profile
May 16, 2018, 08:01:04 PM
 #3224

For people having performance issues on 0.6.1/linux.
Is there a significant CPU-load difference between 0.6 / 0.6.1 on your systems?

Hi DSTM,

I noticed quite a difference in CPU usage between 0.6.0 and 0.6.1 running on vanilla Debian 9.4 (Stretch).
Here it goes: https://imgur.com/a/lNtcqlC

I measured the CPU usages with top over a period of time (around 1 minute or so) and took the average.
The behaviour of 0.6.1 running on my miner is that the last GPU (GPU4) is running at 75% of its capacity.
This rig has 4 GTX 1070 and 1 GTX 1080.  One of the 1070s is GPU4.
That's quite odd (considering the high CPU usage of kworker and some IRQs as well with 0.6.1).
GPU Overclock, memory clock, power limit have been kept identical in the two runs (0.6.0 vs 0.6.1).
The only actual difference is zm executable version.

Hope it helps.  Meanwhile, I reverted to 0.6.0 that uses less CPU and provides a higher combined hashrate on my rig.

Thanks for your good work! Cheers!

Thx, that's very helpful.

For people who have performance issues and also have some time to test - pls pm me.
Keko Fdez
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 104
Merit: 6


View Profile
May 16, 2018, 10:37:38 PM
 #3225

Thank you guys!
Very good result for my rig 6x 1070ti

Equihash algoritm:
Average rate - 3.38 KSol/s
Energy per card - Sol/w 4.20


to get 4 souls/watt on a 1070 ti, means you have the TPD about 58-60% lol you should post you're config cause I just dont see that type of hash rate with that low of TPD.

That is actually not true. I have 6 GTX 1070 Ti and get 4.12 sols/W average between the 6 cards and all of them are running at 70% TDP. The best one it is doing 4.23 sols/W. Have a look




No need to go that low but still I am surprise about the performance difference on the hashrate. I average 3107 maximun 3111 and he is doing 200 more sols average. Are you using Windows or Linux? and what driver version?
Keko Fdez
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 104
Merit: 6


View Profile
May 16, 2018, 10:43:59 PM
 #3226

Thank you guys!
Very good result for my rig 6x 1070ti

Equihash algoritm:
Average rate - 3.38 KSol/s
Energy per card - Sol/w 4.20

nice results... how did you do that? care to share your config? Thanks.

I am sorry but 4 post and results nobody is near them with the same cards on different systems. I think you should upload a pic otherwise I just think you are pretty much bluffing...

I have not seen anyone getting that high hashrate and sols/W with GTX 1070 Ti. That combination does not sound right to me
teammaf
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 35
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 16, 2018, 11:35:58 PM
 #3227

EDIT: fixed

So far new version everything is running smooth/solid.

Def like the difficulty addition to show whole numbers instead of random string of characters.
HashAuger
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 266
Merit: 0


View Profile WWW
May 17, 2018, 12:04:59 AM
 #3228

New Version 0.6.1
- support configuration of 'temp-target', 'intensity', 'pool' via cmd-line parameters

DSTM, thanks for the new version.  I haven't had any issues with latency on MiningPoolHub, ZPool or NiceHash using Windows 10. However, I do have a quick question regarding latency.  Is 1.0  the default value?  Based on my limited testing, I am assuming it is as any lower value reduces the hash rate, but I would like a quick confirmation of that. Thanks.

I guess you're talking about intensity not latency like you wrote.
Intensity is only used to reduce the GPU load - if you don't set the '--intensity' option the intensity code path isn't used and zm will run as fast as possible.

Sorry about my typo. Yes, I meant intensity and not latency in the second sentence. That’s what I get for not proof-reading.  Thanks for clarifying how your miner uses intensity. Other miners, such as CCMiner, use a default intensity that is often less than the maximum and I wanted to make sure that was not the case with DSTM. Keep up the good work.
Slukeass
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 17, 2018, 01:41:27 AM
 #3229

very buggy release. i am using hiveos. dstm 0.6.1.

1. gtx1080ti has hashrate around 200 sols
2. ping problem (already reported here before)
I would have to agree. Both of my rugs dropped 500 sols after jumping onto DSTM 0.6.1. I rolled back to 0.6 and my hash rates jumped up where they should be. I only have one rig near me but it’s not by a tv so I’m not sure how I can get the logs if you need them.
dodgertc
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 29
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 17, 2018, 08:07:35 AM
 #3230

very buggy release. i am using hiveos. dstm 0.6.1.

1. gtx1080ti has hashrate around 200 sols
2. ping problem (already reported here before)

Same problem here... With gtx 1060, dstm 0.6.0 i get ~300 sol/s. Now with dstm 0.6.1 i get around 200 sol/s .
Whats wrong?
https://i.imgur.com/UKFqQvW.png

yes i can confirm that.

are those AMD machines ? i have the same effect on 2 other of these cheap AMD machines, but on the modern intel machine with gigabyte D3A H110 it has no issues and the 0.6.1 performs slightly better.

this is with 0.6 (and its even warm).
Code:
GPU1 56C Sol/s: 491.0 Sol/W: 4.33 Avg: 487.8 I/s: 261.2 Sh: 0.39 0.99 116
GPU0 60C Sol/s: 710.1 Sol/W: 3.58 Avg: 715.4 I/s: 383.2 Sh: 0.58 1.00 112
GPU3 60C Sol/s: 489.1 Sol/W: 4.33 Avg: 487.8 I/s: 261.2 Sh: 0.40 1.00 113
GPU2 52C Sol/s: 493.4 Sol/W: 4.36 Avg: 490.8 I/s: 262.8 Sh: 0.43 0.99 112
GPU4 61C Sol/s: 740.6 Sol/W: 3.68 Avg: 732.8 I/s: 392.4 Sh: 0.63 0.99 112
========== Sol/s: 2924.2 Sol/W: 4.06 Avg: 2914.7 I/s: 1560.8 Sh: 2.41 0.99 113

this is with 0.6.1 just started (so would get lower in a bit)
Code:
_ GPU0 58C 80% | 678.2 Sol/s 678.2 Avg 364.9 I/s | 3.44 S/W 202 W | 0.00 . .
_ GPU1 55C 80% | 474.4 Sol/s 474.4 Avg 254.7 I/s | 4.22 S/W 117 W | 0.00 . .
_ GPU2 50C 80% | 476.2 Sol/s 476.2 Avg 253.9 I/s | 4.31 S/W 104 W | 0.00 . .
_ GPU3 58C 80% | 462.7 Sol/s 462.7 Avg 249.3 I/s | 4.15 S/W 110 W | 0.00 . .
_ GPU4 58C 80% | 747.1 Sol/s 747.1 Avg 402.5 I/s | 3.78 S/W 179 W | 2.99 100 113
============== | 2838.7 Sol/s 2838.7 Avg 1525.3 I/s | 3.98 S/W 713 W | 2.99 100 113


hwinfo:  (its obviously one of my low ROI machines where i use an older downclocked energy save cpu, mb + mem in combination with a 1to4 pci extender. works flawlessly though. its 2x 1080ti 3x1070ti config. OS is SmOS.

Code:
Linux simpleminer 4.11.12-041112-generic #201707210350 SMP Fri Jul 21 07:53:15 UTC 2017 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

Code:

Architecture:          x86_64
CPU op-mode(s):        32-bit, 64-bit
Byte Order:            Little Endian
CPU(s):                4
On-line CPU(s) list:   0-3
Thread(s) per core:    2
Core(s) per socket:    2
Socket(s):             1
NUMA node(s):          1
Vendor ID:             AuthenticAMD
CPU family:            21
Model:                 48
Model name:            AMD A8-7600 Radeon R7, 10 Compute Cores 4C+6G
Stepping:              1
CPU MHz:               1400.000
CPU max MHz:           2800.0000
CPU min MHz:           1400.0000
BogoMIPS:              4990.45
Virtualization:        AMD-V
L1d cache:             16K
L1i cache:             96K
L2 cache:              2048K
NUMA node0 CPU(s):     0-3

cheers

as inquired the cpu usage of 0.6 and 0.6.1 related to above findings.
0.6.1 has higher peaks ie i see it peak to up to 50% cpu usage at least using "top".

0.6
Code:
Tasks: 162 total,   2 running, 160 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
%Cpu(s):  8.4 us, 10.5 sy,  0.0 ni, 81.0 id,  0.0 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.1 si,  0.0 st
KiB Mem :  3963096 total,  2444388 free,  1108500 used,   410208 buff/cache
KiB Swap:        0 total,        0 free,        0 used.  2497384 avail Mem

  PID USER      PR  NI    VIRT    RES    SHR S  %CPU %MEM     TIME+ COMMAND
 4087 miner     20   0 64.963g 588996 434516 S  40.2 14.9   1155:28 zm

0.6.1
Code:
Tasks: 169 total,   2 running, 167 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
%Cpu(s):  9.8 us, 22.1 sy,  0.0 ni, 68.1 id,  0.0 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.1 si,  0.0 st
KiB Mem :  3963096 total,  2464964 free,  1085700 used,   412432 buff/cache
KiB Swap:        0 total,        0 free,        0 used.  2519828 avail Mem

  PID USER      PR  NI    VIRT    RES    SHR S  %CPU %MEM     TIME+ COMMAND
14325 miner     20   0 67.005g 567988 434928 S  40.5 14.3   0:31.95 zm
teammaf
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 35
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 18, 2018, 04:53:59 AM
 #3231

how can i get manual difficulty/static difficulty to pass through?

when I do --pass d=1   it wont take it, even if i do --pass x,d=1

it acts like its not even passing that through and just gives me Varr diff only.

On supernova pools.
jpl
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 153
Merit: 11


View Profile
May 19, 2018, 04:10:12 AM
 #3232

Thank you guys!
Very good result for my rig 6x 1070ti

Equihash algoritm:
Average rate - 3.38 KSol/s
Energy per card - Sol/w 4.20


to get 4 souls/watt on a 1070 ti, means you have the TPD about 58-60% lol you should post you're config cause I just dont see that type of hash rate with that low of TPD.

That is actually not true. I have 6 GTX 1070 Ti and get 4.12 sols/W average between the 6 cards and all of them are running at 70% TDP. The best one it is doing 4.23 sols/W. Have a look




No need to go that low but still I am surprise about the performance difference on the hashrate. I average 3107 maximun 3111 and he is doing 200 more sols average. Are you using Windows or Linux? and what driver version?

Interesting AB settings.  I thought most were closer to this..
power limit 86
temp 72
core clock 133
mem clock 585

.. I tried your settings and output is basically the same... but..
67c   537 sol/s   295 i/s   3.43 s/w   (on my end.. 1080's) 

satanly
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 8
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 19, 2018, 09:22:08 AM
 #3233

I have 2 rigs, one is 6x GTX 1070 and the other one 9x GTX 1070 Ti

With 0.6.1 update:

On the 1070 rig the hash rate went up, but  NOT on the 1070 Ti rig.  Huh

Both rigs are running nvOC (Ubuntu) with 387 driver.

You can see on the 1070 Ti at the start the hash rate is normal, but after 15 min. it drops.

https://imgur.com/KywkWgB

https://imgur.com/CGzArLW
satanly
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 8
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 19, 2018, 11:07:15 AM
 #3234

^^^^

Some additional Info.

The 1070 Rig has a i7-3770K CPU and the 1070 Ti Rig a Pentium G4400 CPU.

Maybe the 1070 Ti Rig can't handle the CPU Load, thats why the hash rate drops.
sikke1
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 24
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 21, 2018, 12:02:08 PM
 #3235

This is same rig with same OC / power settings. 6.1 is not working 6.0 is working. We found this issue in multiple rigs with 6 or more GPU:s trying to upgrade to 6.1


Boot Time: 2018-05-21 14:35:48
System Up Time: up 25 minutes
Miner Up Time: 18:30
Distro: Ubuntu 16.04.3 LTS 4.4.0-97-generic
CPU: Intel(R) Pentium(R) CPU G4400 @ 3.30GHz
Disk / Free Disk: 29G / 19G
Memory / Free Memory: 3897 / 803
Load Average: 2.16 1.71 1.54
Nvidia Driver Version: 390.48

https://imgur.com/a/sLqDGD7
evehuu
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 55
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 21, 2018, 12:24:26 PM
 #3236

Issues with dstm 6.1.0 - low hash on some GPU's

Hardware
MB: B250 mining expert
13x GPU: Nvidia Asus 1060 3 GB

OS: SMOS - NV 1173
Linux Kernel: 4.16.0-rc6-smos

OC:
Core: 0
Memory: 0
Power: 90w

(Tried different OC settings, same result)

--

Out of my 13 GPU's, 5 of them are running on 100-140 sol/s. The rest are fine (290 sol/s)

--

On dstm 6.0.0 - all GPU's running fine with no issues - 290 sol/s


Let me know if you need more info about hardware/software or logfiles.

dstm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 126


View Profile
May 21, 2018, 05:02:03 PM
 #3237

Thx for the reports related to performance issues on 0.6.1/linux.
I'm currently looking into it.
Aleksei_su
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 21, 2018, 05:47:21 PM
 #3238

NO start DSTM miner for Linux Ubuntu - Help!?
kingmoneymastery
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 59
Merit: 1

Join The Frontier


View Profile
May 21, 2018, 06:40:31 PM
 #3239

Hi may I ask what does I/s stand for and what do the last three column readings mean? Mine are 7.31, 100, 36

I am new to dstm miner.

Thank you
Biggen1
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 64
Merit: 0


View Profile
May 22, 2018, 01:01:19 AM
 #3240

Hi may I ask what does I/s stand for and what do the last three column readings mean? Mine are 7.31, 100, 36

I am new to dstm miner.

Thank you

Check the 1st post on the 1st page.
Pages: « 1 ... 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 [162] 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 »
  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!