Bitcoin Forum
May 24, 2019, 08:19:05 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.18.0 [Torrent] (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 ... 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 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 [107] 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 ... 172 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN] dstm's ZCash / Equihash Nvidia Miner v0.6.2 (Linux / Windows)  (Read 222152 times)
NameTaken
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 630
Merit: 502


View Profile
January 08, 2018, 01:25:29 PM
 #2121

...
Beside, zm is mining devfee on zcash flypool (see here: https://zcash.flypool.org/miners/t1NEpmfunewy9z5TogCvAhCuS3J8VWXoJNv insane, am i rite? )
...

LOL... clearly I went into the wrong line of work...

542 ZEC in the last month?!?


If you think that's alot, Claymore is making 1M+ per week.
"There should not be any signed int. If you've found a signed int somewhere, please tell me (within the next 25 years please) and I'll change it to unsigned int." -- Satoshi
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
Seb83
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 41
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 08, 2018, 02:27:37 PM
 #2122

...
Beside, zm is mining devfee on zcash flypool (see here: https://zcash.flypool.org/miners/t1NEpmfunewy9z5TogCvAhCuS3J8VWXoJNv insane, am i rite? )
...

LOL... clearly I went into the wrong line of work...

542 ZEC in the last month?!?


If you think that's alot, Claymore is making 1M+ per week.

Yes, but he has been there for much longer and he has miners for like everything that is mineable!
But you're right... insane too Wink

Anyway. If you calculate, 2% is about $300 a year per rig (at today's rate, so probably much more).
I let you decide if it is too much...

And then, you have pool fee, transactions fee, trading fees, withdrawal fee, income taxes...
EDIT: I forgot electricity! that's about 20% for me
Basically, you guys are mining for others! I'm just saying...
ChuckD
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 3
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 08, 2018, 06:39:18 PM
 #2123

How exactly can I use the json-rpc?

I've enabled the telemetry. If i load IP:port in browser i see the page.

So for json-rpc i tried different options with postman and failed on all. Is there something that i'm missing?
https://i.imgur.com/qgF7EVj.png

I tried writing a scraper for Prometheus using the json-rpc API yesterday, in both Python and then in Java using standard http client libs and found with both that the API does NOT produce a consumable output.  In Java, posting with the specified request ( {"id":1, "method":"getstat"} the post to the API port throws an http.ProtocolException "The server failed to respond with a valid HTTP response".

I'd like to use this more elegant json output from a POST rather than scraping through the html on a GET.

marco.ruiz
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 29
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 08, 2018, 06:44:21 PM
 #2124

How exactly can I use the json-rpc?

I've enabled the telemetry. If i load IP:port in browser i see the page.

So for json-rpc i tried different options with postman and failed on all. Is there something that i'm missing?
https://i.imgur.com/qgF7EVj.png

I tried writing a scraper for Prometheus using the json-rpc API yesterday, in both Python and then in Java using standard http client libs and found with both that the API does NOT produce a consumable output.  In Java, posting with the specified request ( {"id":1, "method":"getstat"} the post to the API port throws an http.ProtocolException "The server failed to respond with a valid HTTP response".

I'd like to use this more elegant json output from a POST rather than scraping through the html on a GET.



This has been discussed before, here's dstm reply:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=2021765.msg26342817#msg26342817
MagicSmoker
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 420
Merit: 181



View Profile
January 08, 2018, 06:47:44 PM
 #2125

Yes, but he has been there for much longer and he has miners for like everything that is mineable!
But you're right... insane too Wink

Anyway. If you calculate, 2% is about $300 a year per rig (at today's rate, so probably much more).
I let you decide if it is too much...

And then, you have pool fee, transactions fee, trading fees, withdrawal fee, income taxes...
EDIT: I forgot electricity! that's about 20% for me
Basically, you guys are mining for others! I'm just saying...

Meh, I don't begrudge the miner authors their cut as long as they deliver something that makes said cut worth paying and respond to issues in a timely manner. That said, bringing in >$360k US every month might sap the motivation to actually do real work... because, baller lifestyle, right?

jpl
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 154
Merit: 11


View Profile
January 09, 2018, 04:18:47 AM
 #2126

hhmmm  Coinbase wants my personal login info for my  bank?  lol.. what could possibly go wrong?
MrTDHP
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 64
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 09, 2018, 05:37:30 AM
 #2127

hhmmm  Coinbase wants my personal login info for my  bank?  lol.. what could possibly go wrong?
That's to verify your bank account instantly. If you don't want to do that you can use the other method, they will deposit your bank some small amount and you need to confirm the amount, but it can take 3+ days
dstm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 126


View Profile
January 09, 2018, 08:20:36 AM
 #2128


Thx, for providing this data.                                                                                                  
You have a lot 'nvidia-settings' processes running in your 'After top' output. This could be the reason for the performance drop.

Just to add my voice to this list, I'm also an SMOS user experiencing the same issue.  HOWEVER, it's only on my 13 card 1070 rigs (H110).  I have a 6 card 1060 rig (Z270-A) that has been running for days with no drop in performance, also on SMOS.

Thanks for being responsive!

UPDATE:  For me, the problem seems to have gone away with v0.5.7.  24 hours solid now with no performance dropoff.  Added 2 more 13 card rigs about 8 hours ago and all seems solid.

Thx for the update, is the issue resolved now?
dstm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 126


View Profile
January 09, 2018, 08:21:28 AM
 #2129

can someone explain to me the new version changelog.

that protocol thing.
It resolves compatibility issues with some pools.
dstm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 126


View Profile
January 09, 2018, 08:22:17 AM
 #2130

at least 1 time a day dstm stops working, hastrate 0, in the logs it does not say any reason. some help? latest version 0.5.8 windows 10 pro
use ETHcontrol (last version)
It has happened to me in 2 different rigs

4:34:59 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 :    GPU2  52C  Sol/s: 503.9  Sol/W: 3.54  Avg: 497.1  I/s: 266.3  Sh: 1.84   0.99 1184 +++
4:35:02 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 :    GPU4  54C  Sol/s: 475.5  Sol/W: 3.47  Avg: 469.7  I/s: 251.6  Sh: 1.69   0.99 1819 ++
4:35:05 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 :    GPU3  55C  Sol/s: 465.6  Sol/W: 3.47  Avg: 469.5  I/s: 251.3  Sh: 1.75   0.99 164
4:35:05 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 :    GPU1  51C  Sol/s: 488.8  Sol/W: 3.54  Avg: 497.7  I/s: 266.8  Sh: 1.75   0.99 582
4:35:07 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 :    GPU0  51C  Sol/s: 470.5  Sol/W: 3.49  Avg: 472.6  I/s: 253.2  Sh: 1.78   0.99 166 +
4:35:08 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 :    GPU5  51C  Sol/s: 466.9  Sol/W: 3.49  Avg: 471.6  I/s: 252.5  Sh: 1.66   0.99 343 +
4:35:08 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 :    ========== Sol/s: 2871.2 Sol/W: 3.50  Avg: 2878.2 I/s: 1541.6 Sh: 10.47  0.99 709
4:35:09 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 :    GPU2  52C  Sol/s: 495.7  Sol/W: 3.54  Avg: 497.1  I/s: 266.0  Sh: 1.84   0.99 1184
4:35:09 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 :    GPU4  53C  Sol/s: 474.2  Sol/W: 3.47  Avg: 469.7  I/s: 251.5  Sh: 1.69   0.99 703 +
4:35:10 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 :    GPU3  55C  Sol/s: 468.7  Sol/W: 3.47  Avg: 469.5  I/s: 251.6  Sh: 1.75   0.99 164
4:35:11 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 :    GPU1  51C  Sol/s: 506.2  Sol/W: 3.54  Avg: 497.7  I/s: 266.3  Sh: 1.75   0.99 582 +
4:36:21 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 : #  zm 0.5.8
4:36:22 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 : #  GPU0 + GeForce GTX 1070         MB: 8192  PCI: 1:0
4:36:23 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 : #  GPU1 + GeForce GTX 1070         MB: 8192  PCI: 2:0
4:36:24 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 : #  GPU2 + GeForce GTX 1070         MB: 8192  PCI: 3:0
4:36:25 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 : #  GPU3 + GeForce GTX 1070         MB: 8192  PCI: 5:0
4:36:26 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 : #  GPU4 + GeForce GTX 1070         MB: 8192  PCI: 6:0
4:36:26 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 : #  GPU5 + GeForce GTX 1070         MB: 8192  PCI: 7:0
4:36:27 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 :
4:36:28 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 : #  telemetry server started
4:36:29 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 : #  connected to: us1-zcash.flypool.org:3333
4:36:35 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 : #  server set difficulty to: 0004189374bc6a7ef9db22d0...
4:36:56 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 : >  GPU0  41C  Sol/s: 481.0  Sol/W: 3.56  Avg: 481.0  I/s: 257.4  Sh: 0.00   . .  
4:36:57 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 : >  GPU1  41C  Sol/s: 498.9  Sol/W: 3.59  Avg: 498.9  I/s: 270.5  Sh: 2.98   1.00 204 +
4:36:59 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 : >  GPU2  42C  Sol/s: 498.0  Sol/W: 3.64  Avg: 498.0  I/s: 270.0  Sh: 0.00   . .  
4:37:01 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 : >  GPU3  48C  Sol/s: 475.9  Sol/W: 3.62  Avg: 475.9  I/s: 256.4  Sh: 0.00   . .  
4:37:03 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 : >  GPU4  45C  Sol/s: 478.7  Sol/W: 3.63  Avg: 478.7  I/s: 255.6  Sh: 3.00   1.00 922 +
4:37:05 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 : >  GPU5  43C  Sol/s: 480.3  Sol/W: 3.67  Avg: 480.3  I/s: 256.6  Sh: 2.99   1.00 141 +
4:37:06 p. m. viernes, 5 de enero de 2018 :    ========== Sol/s: 2912.8 Sol/W: 3.62  Avg: 2912.8 I/s: 1566.3 Sh: 8.97   1.00 422


How are you generating the logfiles? Are you using some kind of restart-script? It might not properly redirect error-messages (stderr).
dstm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 126


View Profile
January 09, 2018, 08:23:01 AM
 #2131

@dstm

Is there any space for change requests? How about adding %subvendor% of the card in output, maybe turned on by parameter.

Thanks.

It's on my todo-list, it was already requested. It seems nvidias libraries don't provide this information on linux, I'll look into to it later again.
dstm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 126


View Profile
January 09, 2018, 08:24:04 AM
 #2132

Could anyone please tell me what cuda is the best for this miner?

Any driver supporting CUDA 8 and above is fine.
dstm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 126


View Profile
January 09, 2018, 08:24:42 AM
 #2133

I have a problem on one of my rigs since I started using 0.5.8. The miner crashes every like 2 days. So, what info can I provide to you so you can check it out? It was stable on 0.5.7 since it was released.

This is most likely due to overclocking, try to reduce it slightly. What messages does zm report after the crash?
dstm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 126


View Profile
January 09, 2018, 08:25:55 AM
 #2134


<snip>
Version 0.5.7
<snip>

Hi,

Thanks for this, I find this version much more stable compared to 0.5.4 which I'd last tried on my Windows 10, Nvidia rig (2 x 1070, 1 x 1080) and also 6-7% better performance than EWBF.

I wanted to ask how to get email notifications whenever there are updates? The forum only offers notifications for the entire post/all new replies and I don't want that.

Let me know if there's a way to do that. Thanks!  Smiley


@DSTM - I'm still using ver 0.5.7 and gratefully paying the 2% devfee, but I have a question/suggestion - Why does the console output keep changing the order of the GPU stats it displays. It starts out as GPU0 onwards in order, but after an hour or two or three, it appears to randomize the order. See screenshot #1 linked below. This makes it quite confusing (and annoying) while viewing the console output to gauge real-time changes.



Also, the apparently random order itself keeps changing every so often, making it even more confusing to view. See screenshot #2 linked below.



Ensuring that the GPU rank/order is maintained would make it much easier to gauge real-time performance changes with a quick glance at the console, esp while tweaking for better performance.

(This is on Flypool. GPU0 & GPU1 are GTX 1080's, GPU2 and GPU3 and GTX 1070's. Driver ver 388.31. Using Windows 10 64-bit. Intel i5-4690k - this is my main PC, so..)

p.s. Also - re: the versioning updates question - can't you put this up on Github or somewhere similar so we can get push notifs for updated versions? This is a very minor issue though, the above issue is higher priority, at least for me. The randomized ordered display of GPUs is quite annoying



This is the order in which things actually happen on your system. It's on my todo list now.
Concerning notifications/distribution, right something like Github seems to be a much better option - I'll switch to Github or something similar.
dstm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 126


View Profile
January 09, 2018, 08:27:28 AM
 #2135

This is my first post on this forum, despite being interested in crypto coins practically since beginning of BTC, so Hi everyone.

I'm thinking about building rig that would be most efficient. Everyone is comparing Sol/s or Sol/W, but as dstm stated (went practically through whole thread yesterday Smiley ), performance should be measured by I/s.
Do you know if anyone performed comparison based on I/s per W and how it relates to Sol/s and Sol/W in long term (as those are probablistic) for specific card models, brands? Could I ask you to submit your data here in following format:

Code:
Brand, Model, MB, I/s, W, Sol/W, Sol/s, %TDP (optional), +/-Core (optional), +/- Memory (optional), comments (optional)
Asus, GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 2048, 39.3, 27.19, 2.68, 72.76,,,,,

When adding yours, please include result posted by previous users and add yours at the end. Normally I would add link to some anonymous notepad like shrib under #nv_dstm_zcash_perf, so others can process and compare it as they wish, but unfortunately i can't post any links Wink

24h runs averages would be best. If brand model name has been previously added by someone, use the same model / brand name so in longer term we can easy compare between products and models by filtering only by them. If possible provide results without OC/Undervolting.

Thanks and keep up good work!

Right, Sol/s are probabilistic - I/s is a better measure for performance especially if you're doing overclocking experiments - however zm includes an average for Sol/s - it will converge after some time - Sol/W is also an average so it will also converge after some time i.e. get pretty accurate. Btw. Sol/W is actually wrong - the units are wrong - the right units are Sol/J (Joule) - zm uses Sol/W since that's easier to understand for most people.
dstm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 126


View Profile
January 09, 2018, 08:28:16 AM
 #2136

Does the recent Meltdown and Spectre OS patches affect the DSTM Miner's performance?
Has anybody done any before/after benchmarks?

From what, I read the recent Meltdown patch (KPTI) affects any programs that call the Kernel frequently such as netwoking, SSD disk access and CUDA memory copy operations from host to GPU.

How often does the DSTM Miner call the Kernel, anyway ?

I'm looking into this on both Operating-Systems. Not all OS-patches are finished currently... so yes, I'm aware of the of the increased systemcall time.
dstm
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 350
Merit: 126


View Profile
January 09, 2018, 08:29:21 AM
 #2137

Hi, dstm! Big thanks for your miner.
I gets a lot of RECV, farm reconnects and keep working, but I think, that shares a lost.
2018-01-08 7:44:12|   ========== Sol/s: 2326.0 Sol/W: 3.46  Avg: 2293.5 I/s: 1249.0 Sh: 7.86   0.99 178
2018-01-08 7:44:15|#  recv failed: 10054
2018-01-08 7:44:15|#  reconnecting
2018-01-08 7:44:26|#  connected to: eu1-zcash.flypool.org:3333

2018-01-08 0:58:46|nvmlDeviceGetTemperature failed (this is my farm goes to sleep! Fixed)
2018-01-08 7:31:52|>  GPU0  32C  Sol/s: 0.2    Sol/W: 3.45  Avg: 473.8  I/s: 0.1    Sh: 1.82   0.99 78 
2018-01-08 7:31:52|   GPU3  33C  Sol/s: 0.1    Sol/W: 3.29  Avg: 452.8  I/s: 0.0    Sh: 1.47   1.00 78 
2018-01-08 7:31:52|   GPU2  33C  Sol/s: 0.1    Sol/W: 3.39  Avg: 465.2  I/s: 0.1    Sh: 1.40   1.00 109
2018-01-08 7:31:52|>  GPU4  32C  Sol/s: 0.3    Sol/W: 3.87  Avg: 463.6  I/s: 0.2    Sh: 1.97   1.00 553
2018-01-08 7:31:52|   ========== Sol/s: 465.6  Sol/W: 3.48  Avg: 2324.2 I/s: 251.2  Sh: 8.32   1.00 179
2018-01-08 7:31:53|   GPU1  33C  Sol/s: 0.1    Sol/W: 3.39  Avg: 464.9  I/s: 0.1    Sh: 1.64   1.00 78 
2018-01-08 7:32:06|   GPU1  40C  Sol/s: 310.9  Sol/W: 3.38  Avg: 463.6  I/s: 169.5  Sh: 1.63   1.00 78 
2018-01-08 7:32:06|   GPU0  38C  Sol/s: 345.2  Sol/W: 3.45  Avg: 472.8  I/s: 183.6  Sh: 1.80   0.99 78 
2018-01-08 7:32:07|   GPU3  40C  Sol/s: 327.9  Sol/W: 3.29  Avg: 451.8  I/s: 176.5  Sh: 1.46   1.00 78 
2018-01-08 7:32:07|#  recv failed: 10054
2018-01-08 7:32:07|#  reconnecting
2018-01-08 7:32:18|#  connected to: eu1-zcash.flypool.org:3333
2018-01-08 7:32:21|#  server set difficulty to: 0004189374bc6a7ef9db22d0...
I changes overclocking for minimum (tdp 50%), but RECV still my guest.
Sorry for my bad english.


This is not due to overclocking, it's a network issue, are you on wifi?
b2s
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 4
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 09, 2018, 10:03:46 AM
 #2138

dtms check last bminer changelog

"* Minor performance improvement for GTX 1060"

Maybe he is using your miner inside somehow?
somethingiswrong
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 31
Merit: 0


View Profile WWW
January 09, 2018, 10:49:51 AM
Last edit: January 09, 2018, 12:02:59 PM by somethingiswrong
 #2139

Anyone got problems since the latest version of dstm's zm miner was updated on SMOS?
SMOS restarts the miner at least once a hour.
Maybe this is a SMOS problem?
I'm using Nvidia GPUs on a ASrock H110 BTC+ PRO...

EDIT: nevemind it seems to be pool timeout
MinerGTX
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 7
Merit: 0


View Profile
January 09, 2018, 02:35:58 PM
 #2140

Does the recent Meltdown and Spectre OS patches affect the DSTM Miner's performance?
Has anybody done any before/after benchmarks?

From what, I read the recent Meltdown patch (KPTI) affects any programs that call the Kernel frequently such as netwoking, SSD disk access and CUDA memory copy operations from host to GPU.

How often does the DSTM Miner call the Kernel, anyway ?

I'm looking into this on both Operating-Systems. Not all OS-patches are finished currently... so yes, I'm aware of the of the increased systemcall time.
Does the dstm miner perform the Blake2b hash on the CPU and transfer the results to the GPU by calling the CUDA driver and the Kernel each time ?
If "yes" then it can be affected by the increased systemcall time.
Pages: « 1 ... 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 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 [107] 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 ... 172 »
  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!