further improved phatk_dia kernel for Phoenix + SDK 2.6 - 2012-01-13

[Diapolo]

Strange: now I am getting the max speed with the original phatk2 included in Phoenix 1.6.2 with my 5750. Here the results of some tests:

phoenix-1.6.2 original
phatk VECTORS FASTLOOP=false AGGRESSION=7 WORKSIZE=256 BFI_INT
=168 Mhs

phoenix-1.6.2 original
phatk2 VECTORS FASTLOOP=false AGGRESSION=7 WORKSIZE=256 BFI_INT
=170 Mhs

phoenix-1.6.2 original
-k phatk2 VECTORS2 FASTLOOP=false AGGRESSION=7 WORKSIZE=256 BFI_INT
=169 Mhs

2011-08-11 kernel 
phatk VECTORS2 FASTLOOP=false AGGRESSION=7 WORKSIZE=256 BFI_INT
= 165 Mhs

2011-08-11 kernel
phatk2 VECTORS2 FASTLOOP=false AGGRESSION=7 WORKSIZE=256 BFI_INT
= 153 Mhs

phatk 2011-07-17 kernel
phatk VECTORS FASTLOOP=false AGGRESSION=7 WORKSIZE=256 BFI_INT
=167 Mhs

poclbm VECTORS FASTLOOP=false AGGRESSION=7 WORKSIZE=256 BFI_INT
= 157 Mhs

Seems mixed up a bit .

phatk = VECTORS2 (with my version)
phatk2 = VECTORS

Dia

[1713484518]

1713484518

[1713484518]

1713484518

[1713484518]

1713484518

[1713484518]

1713484518

[1713484518]

1713484518

[hash]

This worked very good. I've updated my miners.

[mute20]

Anymore updates planned for the future .

Also I saw a 3% boost someone else was touting can I use that in conjunction with this?

[Diapolo]

Anymore updates planned for the future .

Also I saw a 3% boost someone else was touting can I use that in conjunction with this?

Yes, there are updates planned, but it's really hard to squeeze more performance out of this. I'm currently testing a few different paths to achieve better performance!

Where have you seen a 3% tweak? Can you post a link here, so that I can check if this can be included (if it's not in already).

Thanks,
Dia

[mute20]

Can't seem to find it ,but I assume it had similar fixes to yours.

[supersquish]

Thanks for this great kernel mod, it did result in a solid 7~ mhash increase on my 5570, up from 63~. Will donate some if I manage to get amazingly lucky solo mining (I figure it's more fun to try for freak luck, It's a better habbit than lotto tickets right?)

[Diapolo]

Download version 2011-08-27: http://www.mediafire.com/?697r8t2pdk419ji

This version is a bit faster on 58XX cards, reports indicate it can be faster on 69XX cards, too ... I guess this is because of the optimized writing to the output buffer.
You can leave out the BFI_INT switch, but remember to supply the VECTORS2 switch ! This version takes care of wrong WORKSIZE arguments, too ... if you forget that switch, if it has an too big value or if it's not a power of 2, the maximum supported WORKSIZE for each device is used.

Thanks,
Dia

[swapper]

Thanks, we will try.

[pekv2]

What Mhash/s rates the 5830 users receiving on version 2011-08-27?

[Crs]

here's my magic formula:

-k phatk2 AGGRESSION=13 FASTLOOP VECTORS2 WORKSIZE=128 PLATFORM=1
Ati 5850
before:348 Mh/s
after:359 Mh/s

[pk]

here's my magic formula:

-k phatk2 AGGRESSION=13 FASTLOOP VECTORS2 WORKSIZE=128 PLATFORM=1
Ati 5850
before:348 Mh/s
after:359 Mh/s

Saw an increase of 20MH/s, thanks.

[Diapolo]

Download version 2011-12-21: http://www.mediafire.com/?r3n2m5s2y2b32d9

Should restore some of the speed loss for 58XX owners, who switched to SDK / runtime 2.6 and is the best for 69XX owners, too.

Edit: Guys, try a setting of 64 for the WORKSIZE, it showed good results for me, but still depends on the card!

Dia

[jhajduk]

Hi, I noticed a potential improvement

you can replace

Code:

W(121);
sharoundW(121);
W(122);
sharoundW(122);
W(123);
sharoundW(123);

// Round 124
Vals[7] += Vals[3] + P4(124) + P3(124) + P1(124) + P2(124) + s1(124) + ch(124) + H[7];

with

Code:

W(121);
Vals[2] += t1W(121);
W(122);
Vals[1] += t1W(122);
W(123);
                Vals[0] += t1W(123);

// Round 124
Vals[7] += Vals[3] + P4(124) + P3(124) + P1(124) + P2(124) + s1(124) + ch(124) + H[7];

Because you don't need Vals[4],Vals[5], and Vals[6] to compute the final Vals[7]

[Diapolo]

Hi, I noticed a potential improvement

you can replace

Code:

W(121);
sharoundW(121);
W(122);
sharoundW(122);
W(123);
sharoundW(123);

// Round 124
Vals[7] += Vals[3] + P4(124) + P3(124) + P1(124) + P2(124) + s1(124) + ch(124) + H[7];

with

Code:

W(121);
Vals[2] += t1W(121);
W(122);
Vals[1] += t1W(122);
W(123);
                Vals[0] += t1W(123);

// Round 124
Vals[7] += Vals[3] + P4(124) + P3(124) + P1(124) + P2(124) + s1(124) + ch(124) + H[7];

Because you don't need Vals[4],Vals[5], and Vals[6] to compute the final Vals[7]

I'll have to look into this, during the first test all performance relevant numbers were identical to my latest kernel. But perhaps reordering of the operations will help.
Thanks for your input !

Dia

[jhajduk]

I also noticed that if the pools used the 7th 32 bit component of the hash ("g") rather than the first 32 bit ("a") for computing shares you could stop after the 61st round of computation rather than the 63rd.  That would be maybe a 2% efficiency for pools that implemented it.

[Diapolo]

Hi, I'm new to bitcoin mining and I'm not sure if I'm posting this in the correct forum (I can't post in the phoenix thread), I've used guiminer for a few months now and decided to give phoenix a try.
And its great, phoenix is slightly faster and has a stable hashrate.
However I noticed that phatk2 is much slower(50-60Mhashes/s) then pathk, and I believe this optimized kernel is supposed to replace the original pathk2 kernel, because when I overwrite the original pathk kernel with this one my hash rate is almost the same as with pathk2.

Am I using incorrect settings? I have an unlocked 6950 card with 910 mhz core and 1440 mhz memory.

The settings I use are: -k phatk DEVICE=0 VECTORS BFI_INT AGGRESSION=11 worksize=128  FASTLOOP=false

or if I want to run on phatk2:  -k phatk2 DEVICE=0 VECTORS BFI_INT AGGRESSION=11 worksize=128  FASTLOOP=false

I will only comment on my kernel here, which has to be used with:

Code:

-k phatk DEVICE=0 VECTORS2 AGGRESSION=11 WORKSIZE=128 FASTLOOP=false

The normal Phoenix kernel, which is in the default Phoenix download package doesn't have VECTORS2 and needs BFI_INT switch supplied (I activate this by myself if cl_amd_media_ops extension is available).

Dia

[Diapolo]

Hi, I'm new to bitcoin mining and I'm not sure if I'm posting this in the correct forum (I can't post in the phoenix thread), I've used guiminer for a few months now and decided to give phoenix a try.
And its great, phoenix is slightly faster and has a stable hashrate.
However I noticed that phatk2 is much slower(50-60Mhashes/s) then pathk, and I believe this optimized kernel is supposed to replace the original pathk2 kernel, because when I overwrite the original pathk kernel with this one my hash rate is almost the same as with pathk2.

Am I using incorrect settings? I have an unlocked 6950 card with 910 mhz core and 1440 mhz memory.

The settings I use are: -k phatk DEVICE=0 VECTORS BFI_INT AGGRESSION=11 worksize=128  FASTLOOP=false

or if I want to run on phatk2:  -k phatk2 DEVICE=0 VECTORS BFI_INT AGGRESSION=11 worksize=128  FASTLOOP=false

I will only comment on my kernel here, which has to be used with:

Code:

-k phatk DEVICE=0 VECTORS2 AGGRESSION=11 WORKSIZE=128 FASTLOOP=false

The normal Phoenix kernel, which is in the default Phoenix download package doesn't have VECTORS2 and needs BFI_INT switch supplied (I activate this by myself if cl_amd_media_ops extension is available).

Dia

Thanks,I replaced the normal pathk kernel with yours, the performance is now the same in Mh/s although shares seem to come slightly quicker.
Hmm with a worksize of 64 I get slightly better performance(0.5 Mh/s more).
I'm now at ~408 MH/s drops to 407.91 sometimes, and with aggression on 12 I get 408+ Mh/s
Fine tuned aggression to 16 and I get 409+ Mh/s nearly 410.

What's your setup? Driver, OS, card?

[Diapolo]

Thanks for your infos.

The higher the AGRESSION, the more Desktop lag you observe, that's normal.

Dia

[Diapolo]

Thanks for your infos.

The higher the AGRESSION, the more Desktop lag you observe, that's normal.

Dia

No problem, so aggression doesn't affect the speed of shares?

btw I'm having some connection issues every now and then duo to my isp and sometimes I get a warning that my work queue is empty for a few seconds although this only happens once a hour or so.
Could I prevent this from happening by using -q 2 or -q 5, or is this not a good idea?

A higher agression can lead to higher MH/s, while then having more desktop lag.
For your ISP stuff, yes you could try -q 2 or specify a backup pool to Phoenix via -b, which needs the same format as -u.

Dia

[stevegee58]

Hmm I made some calculations and I saw that the Mhash/s is incorrect.
it indicates I get around 418Mh/s
my pool indicates I get 403 Mh/s

7610 9-1-2012 17:18

7879  9-1-2012 18:01

time=2580 sec
shares=269

269 x 2^32 =1 155 346 202 624 / 2580 =447 808 606
447 808 606 / 1 000 000 = 447,808606 Mh/s

or am I doing something wrong here, why are they all reporting different speeds

I've noticed this myself.  Guiminer reports I'm running a pretty solid 185 Mhash/sec but my speed as reported by deepbit is all over the place.
I've seen it as high as 260 and as low as 50.