Vanitygen: Vanity bitcoin address generator/miner [v0.22]

[n4ru]

Has the HD5870 been superseded yet as the best vanity miner? I bought mine for $100 and it gets a whopping 30Mkey/s out of the box. Have newer gen GFX cards surpassed this?

[1538090115]

1538090115

[1538090115]

1538090115

[1538090115]

1538090115

[TheRealSteve]

Has the HD5870 been superseded yet as the best vanity miner? I bought mine for $100 and it gets a whopping 30Mkey/s out of the box. Have newer gen GFX cards surpassed this?

Claim of an nVidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti (3GB 384-bit GDDR5) getting 50-60Mkey/s: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=25804.msg11944467#msg11944467

[n4ru]

Has the HD5870 been superseded yet as the best vanity miner? I bought mine for $100 and it gets a whopping 30Mkey/s out of the box. Have newer gen GFX cards surpassed this?

Claim of an nVidia GeForce GTX 780 Ti (3GB 384-bit GDDR5) getting 50-60Mkey/s: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=25804.msg11944467#msg11944467

o_O Has anyone else tried it? That seems a little insane.

[TheRealSteve]

Does it?  Specs-wise, it is a good bit faster than the HD5870.  I can't say I know which specs' changes would best align with vanitygen changes, but it doesn't seem unfathomable.  I'm sure it's not even removely the fastest; but hardware review sites don't generally test against oclvanitygen

[n4ru]

Does it?  Specs-wise, it is a good bit faster than the HD5870.  I can't say I know which specs' changes would best align with vanitygen changes, but it doesn't seem unfathomable.  I'm sure it's not even removely the fastest; but hardware review sites don't generally test against oclvanitygen

I bought the 5870 when the R9s first came out, and it got swept by the HD5870s by about a 50% difference, as it did against the entire HD7xxx series.

[Kangaderoo]

Could anybody post the necessary code changes to allow oclvanitygen to generate compressed and uncompressed keys simultaneously? I suspect the speed increase must be substantial

Thanks!

Your "suspicion" is misplaced. The only calculation in common that would be saved is the calculation of the x coordinate of the public key, which is just a few multiplications. Everything else, from creating the compressed public key parity, creating an address from a compressed public key and checking for the vanity match would be a completely different process.

As stated before, this was interesting to research.
Unfortunately I don't have a OpenCL environment, so I made the adaptations for CPU only

Code:

>~/vanitygen$ ./vanitygen 1BTC4me --> normal uncompressed
Difficulty: 15058417127
[531.70 Kkey/s][total 5206528][Prob 0.0%][50% in 5.5h]                         
[533.98 Kkey/s][total 6267648][Prob 0.0%][50% in 5.4h]                        
>~/vanitygen$ ./vanitygen 1BTC4me -F compressed --> compressed 
Difficulty: 15058417127                       
[616.63 Kkey/s][total 6103808][Prob 0.0%][50% in 4.7h]                         
[610.36 Kkey/s][total 7794688][Prob 0.1%][50% in 4.7h]                   
>~/vanitygen$ ./vanitygen 1BTC4me -F combined  --> combined un/compressed 
Difficulty: 15058417127
[837.12 Kkey/s][total 8072704][Prob 0.1%][50% in 3.5h]                         
[843.84 Kkey/s][total 8910848][Prob 0.1%][50% in 3.4h]                         

Code:

>~/vanitygen$ ./vanitygen 1BTC4 -F combined -k
Difficulty: 4476342
Pattern: 1BTC4                                                                 
Address: 1BTC4iPDG4247a3nmcnUTcLNS1bbwYRgvJ
Privkey: 5J85mEv3tk1HjYBCm6bcKHVEV9NjwtxFg2cVfY6SnhjW616VBvv  --> uncompressed result
Pattern: 1BTC4                                                                 
Address: 1BTC4pnrA9jnJB3usxhaVs4wweQtpcQ7a7
Privkey: KwJX5idP7UVGHQbL1QZRzjPcgYnXv6AkRsBhmuDzhJfvmASRZBQT --> compressed result
Pattern: 1BTC4                                                                 
Address: 1BTC4caZJqqGZzjEdpbXuX17wyQgv4oRpK
Privkey: KzNUxCmvVui8rLBFY4cMDy7TGeu5MDU7GSfPx1Sevj3RoxkhoL3Q
Pattern: 1BTC4                                                                 
Address: 1BTC4tkVwqUTCmG5fYexRyAaby3UXyt79R
Privkey: 5HqNmZzdjFPGF94hZGJmdeFBoa2hzLkShXQGajeP8n9CoEz8SzJ
Pattern: 1BTC4                                                                 
Address: 1BTC4fZk5atAnE7DH6qW3mjP3AdikkNM6Z
Privkey: KzNUxCmvVui8rLBFY4cMDy7TGeu5MDU7GSfPx1SevmVBzAzN6BMR

If you don't mind if the WIF key is compressed or not, there is a substantiation speed increase when
hashing both the Uncompressed and Compressed EC-point.
With my hack, I'm losing some time on the normal and compressed code execution due to selection overhead.
I'll update my repo @ github after some code cleaning :-)

Update: Github repro updated  

[xhomerx10]

Does it?  Specs-wise, it is a good bit faster than the HD5870.  I can't say I know which specs' changes would best align with vanitygen changes, but it doesn't seem unfathomable.  I'm sure it's not even removely the fastest; but hardware review sites don't generally test against oclvanitygen

I bought the 5870 when the R9s first came out, and it got swept by the HD5870s by about a 50% difference, as it did against the entire HD7xxx series.

 I can get 28MKeys/s with my Sapphire HD7970 and I recently acquired an ASUS Strix GTX 970 which gets 40+MKeys/s with much less power consumption. 

[BurtW]

I do not have time to read the whole thread.  Can someone give me an idea and/or link to the maximum key generation rate claimed?  It is for another thread...

[TheRealSteve]

I do not have time to read the whole thread.  Can someone give me an idea and/or link to the maximum key generation rate claimed?  It is for another thread...

But.. you no longer support vanity addresses...

I haven' gone through the entire thread, I'd imagine there's some crazy SLI setup or so that'll go faster, but I did add the most recent reports to the wiki: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Vanitygen#Expected_keysearch_rate

That page may also contain a hint for said other thread.

[Polyatomic]

Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2630 v3 @ 2.40GHz

Code:

milton@milton:~/temp/vanitygen$ ./vanitygen -v 1xeon
Prefix difficulty:            264104224 1xeon
Difficulty: 264104224
Using 16 worker thread(s)
[2.67 Mkey/s][total 25884672][Prob 9.3%][50% in 58.9s]  

= peachy

I have an R9 390 but I'm using the opensource radeon stack.
samr7's version craps out so I tried the fork of the fella with the
handle of WyseNynja.

Code:

milton@milton:~/temp/testing/vanitygen$ ./oclvanitygen 1xeon
Difficulty: 264104224
[16.09 Mkey/s][total 752353280][Prob 94.2%][95% in 2.4s]                       clWaitForEvent(clUnmapMemObject,4): CL_EXEC_STATUS_ERROR_FOR_EVENTS_IN_WAIT_LIST
Device: AMD HAWAII (DRM 2.42.0, LLVM 3.6.2)
Vendor: AMD (1002)
Driver: 11.0.0-devel
Profile: FULL_PROFILE
Version: OpenCL 1.1 MESA 11.0.0-devel
Max compute units: 40
Max workgroup size: 256
Global memory: 1073741824
Max allocation: 268435456
[16.09 Mkey/s][total 935854080][Prob 97.1%]                                    clWaitForEvents(NDRange,1): CL_EXEC_STATUS_ERROR_FOR_EVENTS_IN_WAIT_LIST

Does anyone know if there is another vanitygen fork I can try.
I wonder if the amdgpu stack will work ...
build log here http://dpaste.com/3X44N1Z

[ChetnotAtkins]

As stated before, this was interesting to research.
Unfortunately I don't have a OpenCL environment, so I made the adaptations for CPU only

Code:

>~/vanitygen$ ./vanitygen 1BTC4me --> normal uncompressed
Difficulty: 15058417127
[531.70 Kkey/s][total 5206528][Prob 0.0%][50% in 5.5h]                         
[533.98 Kkey/s][total 6267648][Prob 0.0%][50% in 5.4h]                        
>~/vanitygen$ ./vanitygen 1BTC4me -F compressed --> compressed 
Difficulty: 15058417127                       
[616.63 Kkey/s][total 6103808][Prob 0.0%][50% in 4.7h]                         
[610.36 Kkey/s][total 7794688][Prob 0.1%][50% in 4.7h]                   
>~/vanitygen$ ./vanitygen 1BTC4me -F combined  --> combined un/compressed 
Difficulty: 15058417127
[837.12 Kkey/s][total 8072704][Prob 0.1%][50% in 3.5h]                         
[843.84 Kkey/s][total 8910848][Prob 0.1%][50% in 3.4h]                         

Code:

>~/vanitygen$ ./vanitygen 1BTC4 -F combined -k
Difficulty: 4476342
Pattern: 1BTC4                                                                 
Address: 1BTC4iPDG4247a3nmcnUTcLNS1bbwYRgvJ
Privkey: 5J85mEv3tk1HjYBCm6bcKHVEV9NjwtxFg2cVfY6SnhjW616VBvv  --> uncompressed result
Pattern: 1BTC4                                                                 
Address: 1BTC4pnrA9jnJB3usxhaVs4wweQtpcQ7a7
Privkey: KwJX5idP7UVGHQbL1QZRzjPcgYnXv6AkRsBhmuDzhJfvmASRZBQT --> compressed result
Pattern: 1BTC4                                                                 
Address: 1BTC4caZJqqGZzjEdpbXuX17wyQgv4oRpK
Privkey: KzNUxCmvVui8rLBFY4cMDy7TGeu5MDU7GSfPx1Sevj3RoxkhoL3Q
Pattern: 1BTC4                                                                 
Address: 1BTC4tkVwqUTCmG5fYexRyAaby3UXyt79R
Privkey: 5HqNmZzdjFPGF94hZGJmdeFBoa2hzLkShXQGajeP8n9CoEz8SzJ
Pattern: 1BTC4                                                                 
Address: 1BTC4fZk5atAnE7DH6qW3mjP3AdikkNM6Z
Privkey: KzNUxCmvVui8rLBFY4cMDy7TGeu5MDU7GSfPx1SevmVBzAzN6BMR

If you don't mind if the WIF key is compressed or not, there is a substantiation speed increase when
hashing both the Uncompressed and Compressed EC-point.
With my hack, I'm losing some time on the normal and compressed code execution due to selection overhead.
I'll update my repo @ github after some code cleaning :-)

Update: Github repro updated  

Very valuable addition, thank you very much! I'll look into it at the end of the week, when I have more time again.

What results did you observe speed-wise?

[Kangaderoo]

 <<-- snip -->

Very valuable addition, thank you very much! I'll look into it at the end of the week, when I have more time again.

What results did you observe speed-wise?

The relative speed differences as posted in the code blocks stayed more or less the same

so ~ +10 % from compressed to uncompressed (no change compared to original code)
    ~ +60 % from uncompressed to combined
    ~ +50 % from compressed to combined

I see no reason why these relative speed increases would not work in OpenCL.

[Inge484]

Hey,

i will use oclvanitygen but I get an error, i  read 1 hours but i don't found the right solution.

i use Win7
AMD APP SDK\2.9 is installed

C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t
"calc_addrs.cl" is there

cmd, C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\oclvanitygen.exe -d 0 -i Hello

error loading kernel file 'calc_addrs.cl': No such file or directory

so what I doing wrong

[TheRealSteve]

cmd, C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\oclvanitygen.exe -d 0 -i Hello
error loading kernel file 'calc_addrs.cl': No such file or directory

Where are you running the command from?  If it's from another directory, a shortcut, or batch file, or anything like that, there's a chance that the working directory is not "C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\".  "C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\" has to be the working directory for oclvanitygen to find that file.

Easiest way to make sure is by opening a command prompt, navigating to that directory, and then running it;

Code:

start > run > cmd (or equivalent)
C:\> cd C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\
C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\> oclvanitygen.exe -d 0 -i He110

( Note that you can't use the lowercase letter L - unrelated to this error, but just in case )

[Inge484]

Hey,

where is the file with the addresses ?

C:\>cd C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\
C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\>oclvanitygen.exe -d 0 -o Test.txt 1ABE


C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\Test.txt - - does not exist

[RustyNomad]

Hey,

where is the file with the addresses ?

C:\>cd C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\
C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\>oclvanitygen.exe -d 0 -o Test.txt 1ABE


C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\Test.txt - - does not exist

It should be there but if not try changing your line to

C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\>oclvanitygen.exe -d 0 -o C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\Test.txt 1ABE

Include the path

Just thinking now, is not maybe a problem with not having administrator right to save in that folder?

If that does not work try and save it somewhere else like -0 C:\Temp\Test.txt

[Inge484]

Hey,

where is the file with the addresses ?

C:\>cd C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\
C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\>oclvanitygen.exe -d 0 -o Test.txt 1ABE


C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\Test.txt - - does not exist

It should be there but if not try changing your line to

C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\>oclvanitygen.exe -d 0 -o C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\Test.txt 1ABE

Include the path

Just thinking now, is not maybe a problem with not having administrator right to save in that folder?

If that does not work try and save it somewhere else like -0 C:\Temp\Test.txt

I test it, but

C:\Users\XX\Test.txt
C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\Test.txt
C:\Windows\Temp\Test.txt
D:\test\Test.txt

oclvanitygen.exe -d 0 -o C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\Test.txt 1ABE

no file ....

[RustyNomad]

Hey,

where is the file with the addresses ?

C:\>cd C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\
C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\>oclvanitygen.exe -d 0 -o Test.txt 1ABE


C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\Test.txt - - does not exist

It should be there but if not try changing your line to

C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\>oclvanitygen.exe -d 0 -o C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\Test.txt 1ABE

Include the path

Just thinking now, is not maybe a problem with not having administrator right to save in that folder?

If that does not work try and save it somewhere else like -0 C:\Temp\Test.txt

I test it, but

C:\Users\XX\Test.txt
C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\Test.txt
C:\Windows\Temp\Test.txt
D:\test\Test.txt

oclvanitygen.exe -d 0 -o C:\Users\XX\Desktop\t\Test.txt 1ABE

no file ....

Not sure what the problem is then, maybe somebody else can assist. I just tested on my pc and it works fine. The text file is there with all the relevant details inside.

[Inge484]

do you create the file self or do it the program ? ( program i think )

how you finish the process ( STRG + C )

[RustyNomad]

do you create the file self or do it the program ? ( program i think )

how you finish the process ( STRG + C )

Just ran another quick test as per the image below. Worked fine and created the text file as you can see