Bitcoin Forum
December 09, 2016, 04:03:08 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.13.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 »  All
  Print  
Author Topic: 3% faster mining with phoenix+phatk for everyone  (Read 35324 times)
t3h
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 19


View Profile
June 27, 2011, 10:37:05 AM
 #41

Wasn't the claimed improvement with hdminer 5% anyway? I wonder if Phoenix is now faster than hdminer... or was it before anyway?

5770 from ~200 to ~210 Smiley
1481256188
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481256188

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481256188
Reply with quote  #2

1481256188
Report to moderator
1481256188
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481256188

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481256188
Reply with quote  #2

1481256188
Report to moderator
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1481256188
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481256188

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481256188
Reply with quote  #2

1481256188
Report to moderator
1481256188
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481256188

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481256188
Reply with quote  #2

1481256188
Report to moderator
1481256188
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1481256188

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1481256188
Reply with quote  #2

1481256188
Report to moderator
bunnybare
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28



View Profile
June 27, 2011, 10:44:16 AM
 #42


5770 from ~200 to ~210 Smiley

Same with me!

Edited BitcoinMiner.cl on poclbm.

1BgX8dP1iuJxamv3ppDmRSPQsEUcw9BeE1
manifold
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 62


View Profile
June 27, 2011, 11:17:25 AM
 #43

works perfectly. Many thanks!!!

Osiris Bitcoin Forum
This is a recursive text, if you restart reading from the beginning. And you will never get to this point informing you that it had no exit condition.
klaaster
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 126



View Profile
June 27, 2011, 11:36:12 AM
 #44

 Very nice hack, gives me 2% to 3% more on HD5850/30.

Great find!   Smiley
forexmasterja
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 130



View Profile WWW
June 27, 2011, 11:38:04 AM
 #45

This works great !!! got an extra 100 MH with all my cards combined. I'm very grateful for this but this is definitely gonna push the difficulty up when this gets more public.

Worth a donation definitely!

6870 295mh => 312mh
5850 350mh => 362mh
6870 411mh => 426mh

Again great find.

--** First Jamaican Bitcoin User **--
1JamaicaYQvsBkvm5JcurQBA9Kz969nsqe
Revolutionary Money Making Cloud Miner - https://cex.io/r/0/forexmasterja/0/
syb3ria
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 56


'buntusiast


View Profile
June 27, 2011, 12:12:07 PM
 #46

It's good to know that helps fellow miners, yet i get 16-20 mh\s more with that. http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=19051.0. All that is going on Powercolor 5770 @ 990/171 with -f 1 and -f 20 on win 7 x64. Anyway keep up the good work. We all need optimisations Smiley
heroBitcoin
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 12


View Profile
June 27, 2011, 02:03:06 PM
 #47

cool, will try these method
bitless
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28


View Profile
June 27, 2011, 02:28:04 PM
 #48

Thanks for your code. It's nice to see people get rewarded for their efforts (though it doesn't always happen). Well, I've tried it on my own miner (minerd) and have some very strange findings.

https://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=21275.0

First of all, minerd supports up to 4 vectors, and when I add this change to my kernel, it actually _slows down_ the 4 vector version. But when I override it to set 2 vectors, it speeds it up. However, once it's sped up, I then get runs of rejected shares. I tried it multiple times with and without and it does appear to be just this change that causes it, so I'm not sure what's going on.

I honestly do not know what's up with that, I saw ATI asm yesterday for the first time and can't tell you exactly what's wrong yet. All I know is that the truth tables match for the Ma() function with and without my modifications. Yet, here's a couple of ideas -
1 glancing through the doc, radeons are VLIW5 = 4+1, with 4 'normal' pipelines and one transcendental pipe, which can do a restricted set of instructions. I don't know where BFI_INT gets executed, but if it is only in the trans. pipe, then doing too many BFI's can hurt the performance by making that pipe a bottleneck. Check the docs and let us know, if you don't mind.
2 if (z^x) isn't already used in other places in your code, then it may be pushing up the register usage and you're running less threads in parallel. Again, I don't know much about ATI, but it would be the first thing I'd check if we were on nVidia/CUDA.
3 something else altogether...

Not sure. Sorry. If I think of anything else, I'll post it Smiley In the meantime, it would also suck if people started getting more rejected shares... hmmm. I don't, it does work for me, but I encourage everyone to check their results (the actual amount of accepted shares that they get).
bitless
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28


View Profile
June 27, 2011, 02:45:26 PM
 #49

Thanks for your code. It's nice to see people get rewarded for their efforts (though it doesn't always happen). Well, I've tried it on my own miner (minerd) and have some very strange findings.

https://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=21275.0

First of all, minerd supports up to 4 vectors, and when I add this change to my kernel, it actually _slows down_ the 4 vector version. But when I override it to set 2 vectors, it speeds it up. However, once it's sped up, I then get runs of rejected shares. I tried it multiple times with and without and it does appear to be just this change that causes it, so I'm not sure what's going on.

Also, a very silly thing here -> I've posted   #define Ma(x, y, z) amd_bytealign( (z^x), (y), (x) ), but I really should have put all expressions in parentheses. So, ((z)^(x)) and not (z^x) etc.... you know Smiley

Regardless. You got me worried about rejected shares. I HIGHLY encourage one of us to go through the truth table in my original post and the C code that was used to generate it to make sure there's no errors. That's why I posted it to begin with. It would really suck if it didn't work.
czz
Jr. Member
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 48


View Profile
June 27, 2011, 03:24:07 PM
 #50

Did not notice any increase in the reject ratio. Using 5870, came from 439 to 449 MH/s.
Many thanks.

Bitcoin address: 1GAEheqiqsMz2oTpnzMV5A4PLzyDWgXPDf
bitless
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28


View Profile
June 27, 2011, 03:29:39 PM
 #51

Heeey! This change is now in git repository! I'd still parenthesize (z^x) as ((z)^(x)), but regardless, thanks m0mchill and everybody!

https://github.com/m0mchil/poclbm/commit/3d43c4e4c2c476cf367822868202f02d168d6f3b

themike5000
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 99


View Profile
June 27, 2011, 03:32:02 PM
 #52

Boosted me from 319MH/sec on my 6870 to 326MH/sec.  Not bad.

I"m using GuiMiner v2011-06-09 because v2001-06-14 didn't have a BitcoinMiner.cl file.  Anybody know where to find this file in the newest GUIminer release?

Vertcoin: VdHjU3L2dcHCR3uQmqpM6mf4LCvp2678wh
Kauwi
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2


View Profile
June 27, 2011, 03:37:01 PM
 #53

I HIGHLY encourage one of us to go through the truth table in my original post and the C code that was used to generate it to make sure there's no errors. That's why I posted it to begin with. It would really suck if it didn't work.

You posted the truth-table (and modified the code) for the MA-function, but your C-code is for the CH-function.
But Your thruth-table for MA-function is correct.

All I got from 100 monkeys with 100 typewriters is this: 1D2rvNVAphaz6z7r8ocTBeP2jivmJCkYuX
brunoshady
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 264

Dubs Get


View Profile
June 27, 2011, 03:54:34 PM
 #54

not too much increase here in 5850... about 4/5 mhash =(
ananas5
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28


View Profile
June 27, 2011, 03:58:53 PM
 #55

Thanks! HD6850 270MHash/s -> 279Mhash/s

If you liked my post, you are free to donate: 17edqFhWUTMthCoLxXNzAxnes8roNLUcik
Thank you.
bitless
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 28


View Profile
June 27, 2011, 04:05:08 PM
 #56

I HIGHLY encourage one of us to go through the truth table in my original post and the C code that was used to generate it to make sure there's no errors. That's why I posted it to begin with. It would really suck if it didn't work.

You posted the truth-table (and modified the code) for the MA-function, but your C-code is for the CH-function.
But Your thruth-table for MA-function is correct.

Sorry about the confusion. CH = BFI_INT, since BFI does the same thing as the CH function in the hash spec. MA is built using CH/BFI, so there's a define for CH (copied from and docs) and the MA built on top of CH. Thank you for verifying this stuff. 
Kauwi
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2


View Profile
June 27, 2011, 04:20:42 PM
 #57

I HIGHLY encourage one of us to go through the truth table in my original post and the C code that was used to generate it to make sure there's no errors. That's why I posted it to begin with. It would really suck if it didn't work.

You posted the truth-table (and modified the code) for the MA-function, but your C-code is for the CH-function.
But Your thruth-table for MA-function is correct.

Sorry about the confusion. CH = BFI_INT, since BFI does the same thing as the CH function in the hash spec. MA is built using CH/BFI, so there's a define for CH (copied from and docs) and the MA built on top of CH. Thank you for verifying this stuff. 

Ah, i see. Didnt look close enough to the printf();
Sorry for that.

All I got from 100 monkeys with 100 typewriters is this: 1D2rvNVAphaz6z7r8ocTBeP2jivmJCkYuX
Keninishna
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 551



View Profile WWW
June 27, 2011, 04:35:10 PM
 #58

woot works for me with guiminer. I edited the kernel.cl file in the phatk directory.
burp
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 98


View Profile
June 27, 2011, 04:38:21 PM
 #59

10MH improvement, thanks!  Shocked
theunforgiven
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 13


View Profile
June 27, 2011, 04:46:56 PM
 #60

Gigabyte 5850 @ 1000/300 - from 390MHash/s to 400MHash/s with the mod applied.

Got a question, which boolean operator is used to sum all the outputs?

((y),(x|z),(z&x))

"Y" , "X or Z", "Z and X"

xyz| (x|z) | (z&x) | y ? (x|z) ? (z&x)  | Ma
000|   0    |    0    |              ?             |  0
001|   1    |    0    |              ?             |  0
010|   0    |    0    |              ?             |  0
011|   1    |    0    |              ?             |  1
------------------------------------------------
100|   1    |    0    |              ¿             |  0
101|   1    |    1    |              ¿             |  1
110|   1    |    0    |              ¿             |  1
111|   1    |    1    |              ¿             |  1
Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 »  All
  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!