bitless (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 04:53:09 PM |
|
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))
It is the CH function; given 3 arguments, a,b,c, CH returns B when A==0, and C when A==1. This is the same as (a&b)|(~a&c), which is the way BFI_INT is defined in ATI's docs.
|
|
|
|
Hawkix
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 04:59:30 PM |
|
Great, went up promised 3%. So I sent you 3% of my daily income as a tip! Thanks!
Its great someone tries to improve on the OpenCL code. Maybe, if we could check the result of OpenCL compilation (VLIW assembler?), we could fine tune a bit more.
|
|
|
|
PcChip
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 05:12:40 PM |
|
So m0mchill (or somebody?) already updated the code repository, and hasn't sent you a "thank you" PM yet ?
|
Legacy signature from 2011: All rates with Phoenix 1.50 / PhatK 5850 - 400 MH/s | 5850 - 355 MH/s | 5830 - 310 MH/s | GTX570 - 115 MH/s | 5770 - 210 MH/s | 5770 - 200 MH/s
|
|
|
bitless (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 05:16:36 PM |
|
So m0mchill (or somebody?) already updated the code repository, and hasn't sent you a "thank you" PM yet ?
No, but it is me who should be thanking them for writing these awesome miners to begin with!
|
|
|
|
heroBitcoin
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 12
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 05:19:08 PM |
|
yeah, awesome information, thx guy
|
|
|
|
theunforgiven
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 13
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 05:24:45 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
Soak
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 05:25:12 PM Last edit: June 27, 2011, 05:42:39 PM by Soak |
|
WoW ![Shocked](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/shocked.gif) 310 to 380 Mhash ( +18.42%) ! AWESOME! Thank you! phoenix -u http://x:x@x:1234/;askrate=10 -k phatk VECTORS BFI_INT AGGRESSION=7 DEVICE=0 phoenix -u http://x:x@x:1234/;askrate=10 -k phatk VECTORS BFI_INT AGGRESSION=7 DEVICE=1 6970 @ CrossfireProof:Before After![](https://ip.bitcointalk.org/?u=http%3A%2F%2Fi.min.us%2Fjb8THQ.jpg&t=665&c=O7CJOKa3-EQxcg)
|
|
|
|
Fiyasko
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1428
Merit: 1001
Okey Dokey Lokey
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 05:28:32 PM |
|
FYI, You can make the identical change to phoenix+poclbm with the same 2% increase in speed.
Do tell, If theres a simple file to replace that you can upload i'll definitly Tip you Winx86 GUIminer-poclbm
|
|
|
|
Rob P.
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 05:40:16 PM |
|
Just tossing my confirmations out there:
Sapphire 5830s:
Pair 1: 264 Mhash/sec -> 271 Mhash/sec (each) at 875 MHz GPU, 900 MHz RAM (2.58% increase) Pair 2: 273 Mhash/sec -> 281 Mhash/sec (each) at 900 MHz GPU, 600 MHz RAM (2.84% increase)
I'm also tracking Rejected shares.
Before Patch: Pair 1: ~2.6% rejects (after 800+ shares) Pair 2: ~3.2% rejects (after 800+ shares)
After Patch: Pair 1: ~3.0% rejects (after 650+ shares) Pair 2: ~4.0% (after 750+ shares)
So, the increase appears to also cause additional rejects that should be discounted from total increase gain, cutting it down a full 1% in my case.
|
--
If you like what I've written here, consider tipping the messenger: 1GZu4CtHa6ai8iWoWiVFxV5VVoNte4SkoG
If you don't like what I've written, send me a Tip and I'll stop talking.
|
|
|
bitless (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 05:42:39 PM |
|
FYI, You can make the identical change to phoenix+poclbm with the same 2% increase in speed.
Do tell, If theres a simple file to replace that you can upload i'll definitly Tip you Winx86 GUIminer-poclbm at the office now, no access to the miners, I'll take a look once I get home. In the meantime, search for .cl files and see if you have any Ma (or, even better, amd_bytealign) strings in them and take it from there.
|
|
|
|
bitless (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 05:46:13 PM |
|
Just tossing my confirmations out there: ... So, the increase appears to also cause additional rejects that should be discounted from total increase gain, cutting it down a full 1% in my case.
This is really not good. I honestly do not know why this would happen; are you sure it is related to the patch and isn't a result in the general randomness when searching for solutions? Perhaps someone else, more familiar with bitcoin mining than me, can chime in?
|
|
|
|
bitless (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 05:49:49 PM |
|
can't do it ![Sad](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/sad.gif) Yes, you can ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) what you've done is the CH function, not MA. Now you can build MA on top of it. I don't think this belongs to this thread though, so you can pm me and we'll figure it out. Alternatively, you can ask someone around you for help - two heads are better than one.
|
|
|
|
bitless (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 05:50:54 PM |
|
WoW ![Shocked](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/shocked.gif) 310 to 380 Mhash ( +18.42%) ! AWESOME! Thank you! Neat-o-rama! Somehow I still don't believe you (and my eyes) ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif)
|
|
|
|
PcChip
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 05:53:43 PM |
|
WoW ![Shocked](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/shocked.gif) 310 to 380 Mhash ( +18.42%) ! AWESOME! Thank you! Neat-o-rama! Somehow I still don't believe you (and my eyes) ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) I noticed he's using Crossfire on those cards, perhaps the kernel patch somehow makes up for % loss due to using crossfire?
|
Legacy signature from 2011: All rates with Phoenix 1.50 / PhatK 5850 - 400 MH/s | 5850 - 355 MH/s | 5830 - 310 MH/s | GTX570 - 115 MH/s | 5770 - 210 MH/s | 5770 - 200 MH/s
|
|
|
Soak
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 05:54:05 PM |
|
Neat-o-rama! Somehow I still don't believe you (and my eyes) ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif) I do 370 Mhashes with poclbm and the new formula (365 without). I do 380 Mhashes with phatk and the new formula (310 without). So, really, +2.63% between poclbm and phatk with the new formula.
|
|
|
|
TurdHurdur
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 05:56:19 PM |
|
Just tossing my confirmations out there: ... So, the increase appears to also cause additional rejects that should be discounted from total increase gain, cutting it down a full 1% in my case.
This is really not good. I honestly do not know why this would happen; are you sure it is related to the patch and isn't a result in the general randomness when searching for solutions? Perhaps someone else, more familiar with bitcoin mining than me, can chime in? I'm not seeing this issue with my miners. They range from 0.12% to 2.07% stale. A variance that I'd say rules out your patch being the cause of any supposed increased stales.
|
|
|
|
theunforgiven
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 13
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 06:02:37 PM |
|
I want to minimize the expression applying Karnaugh. So I need the main expression that is used on the kernel. But i can't figure out with it.
|
|
|
|
Hawkix
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 06:09:12 PM |
|
Seriously, the Ma() function is soo deeply burried, so that if it was wrong, by the principle of good hashing function like SHA256 is, all the hashes would fail.
So, if it can find some good results, all are, with 99.999999999999% probability correct, too.
|
|
|
|
bitless (OP)
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 06:16:07 PM |
|
Seriously, the Ma() function is soo deeply burried, so that if it was wrong, by the principle of good hashing function like SHA256 is, all the hashes would fail.
So, if it can find some good results, all are, with 99.999999999999% probability correct, too.
More like 2^-128 if not less ![Smiley](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/smiley.gif)
|
|
|
|
Clipse
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
June 27, 2011, 06:53:39 PM |
|
Nice, avg about 2% mhash boost at same clocks. I notice no additional stales, still hovering at 1%
|
...In the land of the stale, the man with one share is king... >> ClipseWe pay miners at 130% PPS | Signup here : Bonus PPS Pool (Please read OP to understand the current process)
|
|
|
|