[JCE]Fast & stable CN/v8/Heavy/Tube/XHV miner, CPU+GPU, Vega56 1800+ RX580 1200+

[JCE-Miner]

alpha and beta are internal data packing modes. I cannot tell more without revealing code secrets. They must be power of two, and only three values are decent for them, respectively 32/64/128 and 4/8/16, except for very old cards where extreme values like alpha=256 or beta=32 can be good.

Other greeks are deprecated, note they no longer appear in the doc.

[UnclWish]

OpenCL bug 0.2-10: i could reproduce it on my rig by using exotic characters in the path where JCE exe was, and this case is fixed. But there may be another cause of bug. Did you use non-english path too?

Hashrate: first, yes, the +15% is not fake, but it can be canceled by the higher instability on some cards. On old cards, it's +20% faster and stable, easy. HD6000, HD7000, R7, R9... On big RX and Vega, things are more complicated.
I read here opposite results, so:
* Ensure you're talking about CN-Heavy and related, CN-v8 is not concerned by the 0.33b6 release
* Is it unstable on the 8Gb RX and Vega only? Sure that's the most common cards, but if this is the status, it's an important detail to track the bug down. I did my long-run tests on 2G and 4G cards only so far. If I need a 8G card to reproduce the bug, i've some, so i need to focus on them.

I suspend GPU support and dev for now, going back to CPU version where i've a fistful of Github tickets to close.

I didn't noticed any + in hashrate on my R9 270X 4Gb (3,5 OpenCL). On pre-b5 versions on heavy it was 420 h/s and now speed the same, only fee increased...

[GrayCatt]

I use Win10 and catalyst 14.4.

Please, tell us how did you manage to install _14.4_ Catalyst on Windows _10_. As far as I see, maximum Windows version for 14.xx drivers is Win8.1.

[Ultrasonik]

OpenCL bug 0.2-10: i could reproduce it on my rig by using exotic characters in the path where JCE exe was, and this case is fixed. But there may be another cause of bug. Did you use non-english path too?

DEV  BIG thanks! it all worked
I did not immediately understand that it was necessary to avoid Russian letters in folders with the JCE program!

as sample  d:\JCE _MONERO\033b6\   all work nice!

as sample  d:\MAЙHEP\033b6\   error

[JCE-Miner]

Thanks for report, but it should work now even with russian letters. I'll do more test with the exact same path as you.

@UnclWish
I let the pre-b5 online on purpose, but that's very surprising you noticed no increase. I had +15/+20% on all the card I tested from the HD6950 to the RX. It's not impossible your Curacao chip doesn't get any extra speed, but very strange. And i dedicated the release to you, so sad

[BS0D]

And that's with usage of FX4330(4-core, 8M, 4GHz)

CN-Heavy consumes 4M of cache, better use two threads with multi-hash 1

Agree with your logic but it does less hashes that way.
So, I've got some observes:
0¹ + 3¹ = 114   0¹ + 3² = 128   0² + 3¹ = 128
0¹ + 2¹ = 114   0² + 2¹ = 128
0¹ + 1¹ = 92   0² + 1¹ = 85   0¹ + 1² = 85
1¹ + 2¹ = 114   1² + 2¹ = 128   1¹ + 2² = 128
2¹ + 3¹ = 92   2² + 3¹ = 85

The conclusion may be that miner uses not the only L3 cache which is one for all cores but it uses L2 caches which are numbered to core modules on the exact cpu.
FX4330 has 2 modules by 2 cores with 2MB L2 each. And the sum of L2 and L3 is exact 12MB.
Unfortunately I've already sold all of my 8300 and 6300 FXes. Would be nice to test them again.
That can be used to tune any CPU.

[JCE-Miner]

Hooo, right, I forgot this point, the L2 and L3 are exclusive on those chips. Normal.
This is no longer the case for Zen architecture.

[Ultrasonik]

Tell please the optimal manual configuration settings for AMD RX5XX/4XX with 8 GB  for  cryptonight-saber  bittube
I found on the forum only for 4 GB cards

[UnclWish]

@UnclWish
I let the pre-b5 online on purpose, but that's very surprising you noticed no increase. I had +15/+20% on all the card I tested from the HD6950 to the RX. It's not impossible your Curacao chip doesn't get any extra speed, but very strange. And i dedicated the release to you, so sad

Thank you for heavy algo opt! And thanx for dedicating this to me )))). On RX 580 I have some increase in heavy algo... Not 10% but about 5%. Now triyng to find parameters for stable speed...

270X - Pitcairn... Why Curacao? Maybe I didn't have increase cause of 3,5Gb vmem for OpenCL? Or wrong parameters... What parameters you recommend?

[Iamtutut]

It's online 0.33b6 GPU

I mined Haven for 48 hours on 3 capricious RX and had a very stable hashrate, varying +/- 2% not more, I hope it will be better for everybody.

My GPUs could get through the warmup, still with swings (mostly RAM frequency, sometimes core freq). Declared speed in itself is highly improved compared to my reference JCE 0.32G version, +15% for same power draw (at wall). If my computer stay stable during the night, I'll check the reported HR at the pool.

Almost 9hs mining tube and counting.
Max speed is 2316H/s, I had never got above 2030H/s with my reference 0.32G version, so that's a solid +15% speed.
Current effective HR: 2250H/s.
Power draw at the wall: 365-370W, this include the CPU mining which consumes around 30W.

That's a HUGE improvement in terms of speed with the same wattage, impressive.


One important point: I had to lower both core and mem clock on 2 out of 3 GPUs.

12H30mn mining with lastest version.

Max HR: 2318H/s
Effective: 2193H/s
Power draw: still 365-370W

[BS0D]

JSON: is it really forbidden by the json standard to write

Code:

"a" : 
{42}

rather than

Code:

"a" :{
42}

?

It may be acceptable by json standard but any json validator fixes the code that way.
May be the problem occurs when using 'json.parse' where every single string should be understood as it should be. For example the string starting with "hashrate": should end with a value or a bracket.
I maybe wrong ofcourse.

Some headers like 'Access-Control-Allow-Origin' and 'Access-Control-Allow-Methods' are missing. Which are needed to make for example GET requests.
As for json, there maybe some services or functions need an iconic-like syntax to work properly.

[Uaciuganadu]

What you need is already available to script this:

* Do short tests: parameter --autoclose N to close after N minutes (the 1st minute has no fee)
* Generate a different config for each test: just generate the JSON config, it's a piece of standard JSON
* Read the hashrate: the JSON output is perfect, or use --log <file> then parse the file

and repeat repeat until you get the optimum.

Yes, i do understand this can be done the hard way but i was asking for an easy way that would come in a bat file with the miner for every user to test and then be able to report the findings for the git.

[ivomm]

What is the power draw from the wall for CN heavy and v8 for 570 and 580 cards?

[NecronomicoN]

Tell please the optimal manual configuration settings for AMD RX5XX/4XX with 8 GB  for  cryptonight-saber  bittube
I found on the forum only for 4 GB cards

Sapphire Radeon NITRO+ RX 580 8GB (11265-01-20G)
{ "mode": "GPU", "worksize": 8, "alpha": 64, "beta": 8, "gamma": 4, "delta": 4, "epsilon": 4, "zeta": 4, "index": 2, "multi_hash": 832 },
{ "mode": "GPU", "worksize": 8, "alpha": 64, "beta": 8, "gamma": 4, "delta": 4, "epsilon": 4, "zeta": 4, "index": 2, "multi_hash": 832 },

or, and

{ "mode": "GPU", "worksize": 8, "alpha": 64, "beta": 8, "gamma": 4, "delta": 4, "epsilon": 4, "zeta": 4, "index": 2, "multi_hash": 896 },
{ "mode": "GPU", "worksize": 8, "alpha": 64, "beta": 8, "gamma": 4, "delta": 4, "epsilon": 4, "zeta": 4, "index": 2, "multi_hash": 896 },

[danspasiva]

Thanks, and that's also my first idea: recent JCEs are faster but support a lot less to mine on 99% available memory. The trick is that the b5 and b6 no longer need to use all memory to get fast, I tried to configure my 4G cards exactly like my 2G (with about 1900M memory allocated) and they mined fast. Increasing the 4G cards load over 2G gave very little extra speed at the cost of a very unstable hashrate.

Maybe the fix is just to warm users to update their older config and use less memory. I'm afraid a lot of users just updated their binary keeping the old config on 8G with maximum memory load, as it was the rule on previous versions, and is still on other miners like Cast or SRB.

To all who have the problem: configure your 8G card like if it was a 6G, leaving free vram on it and retry. I'd expect to get -1% speed and a very more stable hashrate.
I remember this rule from older Claymore 9 with mode -a 1: it provided +2% extra perf with +20% power consumption, 100% memory usage and random crashes. Not a good deal.

Hey JCE, thanks for all your wonderful miner work over quite some time.

As you know the b6 and b5 are very unstable for rx 8gb.  Based on reading this response that you wrote, I understood that you are saying to lower the multi-hash a bit?  The multihash is what determines the amount of memory used correct?  So perhaps going from 944 to 896 might be a good solution?  Can u elaborate on this proposed solution?  Thanks!!

Keep working hard you are the best around.

[lstrike]

I read here opposite results, so:
* Ensure you're talking about CN-Heavy and related, CN-v8 is not concerned by the 0.33b6 release
* Is it unstable on the 8Gb RX and Vega only? Sure that's the most common cards, but if this is the status, it's an important detail to track the bug down. I did my long-run tests on 2G and 4G cards only so far. If I need a 8G card to reproduce the bug, i've some, so i need to focus on them.

Sorry you are right - I haven't specified the algo - CN-heavy

580/8GB, 1250/2000

     { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 0, "multi_hash":992 },
     { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 0, "multi_hash":992 },

032q - stable 1165h/s

033b6 - unstable 1000-1220h/s (varies) and the total hash for the rig - lower that stable 1165 with older version for all cards.

Same situation is on vega56.

Lowering milti_hash, only decrease the hasrate, the fluctuations remain. 4GB no problem.

[vmozara]

I have switched all my miners to heavy. 50 Vega cards total. Seems to be stable so far. I will mine for 24 hours and if stable I will share here all the setup I have. I believe I will have around 85 000 pool hashrate after fees deduction, and consumption of around 8000W from the wall.

[carlosmonaco]

Hello,
I need some help,
I have 4 RX 580 nitro + (8go) , 1 hynix , 3 micron . I was mining with SRB at 850h/s each( V8 xmr)

I did this to increase my hashrate.
- Custom build with SRB Polaris ( I just pressed PIMP my strap then save BIOS and flash)
- then I DDU my old driver and install new one 18.6.1.
- then used atidmkpacher
- I tried the latest version of the miner

But now I'm mining at 350h/s each...

[NecronomicoN]

Hello,
I need some help,
I have 4 RX 580 nitro + (8go) , 1 hynix , 3 micron . I was mining with SRB at 850h/s each( V8 xmr)

I did this to increase my hashrate.
- Custom build with SRB Polaris ( I just pressed PIMP my strap then save BIOS and flash)
- then I DDU my old driver and install new one 18.6.1.
- then used atidmkpacher
- I tried the latest version of the miner

But now I'm mining at 350h/s each...

compute mode, enabled?

[carlosmonaco]

Hello,
I need some help,
I have 4 RX 580 nitro + (8go) , 1 hynix , 3 micron . I was mining with SRB at 850h/s each( V8 xmr)

I did this to increase my hashrate.
- Custom build with SRB Polaris ( I just pressed PIMP my strap then save BIOS and flash)
- then I DDU my old driver and install new one 18.6.1.
- then used atidmkpacher
- I tried the latest version of the miner

But now I'm mining at 350h/s each...

compute mode, enabled?

Thanks, I forgot that. Now it's better but I'm still at 850h/s with 1250 clock 2200 memory..