|
UnclWish
|
 |
December 03, 2018, 08:04:57 AM |
|
For my RX 580 8Gb 33-sync version didn't give max speed all the time... After 10-20 minutes speed can be max, but after some time it drops. After 2-3 hour speed on both GPUs is dropped to 985-1015 h/s (Max speed on b5+ versions is 1170-1180 h/s) and stable. Method with disabling/enabling GPU's didn't helps to boost speed...
Effective hashrate after 3 hours is only 1900 h/s...
Forced to return to version b4 - it gives about 5-8% lower speed (about 1120 h/s) but stable and effective hashrate is close to max speed.
All talking about heavy algo of course...
JCE, b5+ to sync versions requires more power than b4 version? Can my speed problem be cause of lack of power?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pennywis3
|
|
December 03, 2018, 09:10:04 AM |
|
0.33-sync GPU works great, all cards warm up and stay at max hash. Good job  |
|
|
|
|
|
Iamtutut
|
|
December 03, 2018, 09:16:59 AM |
|
4th trial with the new experimental version. >3h30mn mining.
Still 4X RX574 with bios mod, intensity set to 464 for all threads.
Power draw at the wall: 470W
Max HR: 3709H/s.
Usual is between 3700 and 3707H/S.
Actual reported HR by the miner: 3645,45H/s
HR seen by the pool:
- last 15mn: 3,6KH/s
- last 2Hs: 3,85KH/s
That's quite amazing, just think that 3 months ago to reach such HR would have required a Vega 64 FE + a good Vega 56.
15 hours, actual reported speed: 3510H/s. |
|
|
|
|
|
UnclWish
|
|
December 03, 2018, 09:25:19 AM |
|
0.33-sync GPU works great, all cards warm up and stay at max hash. Good job What cards, drivers, config please? |
|
|
|
|
HardKano
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 76
Merit: 0
|
|
December 03, 2018, 01:45:29 PM |
|
Hey JCE. If you want to be more known in the CN community I suggest you to contact cryptunit team to get listed in their website : https://www.cryptunit.com/downloads |
|
|
|
|
christiano88
Member
Offline
Activity: 161
Merit: 10
|
|
December 03, 2018, 02:44:40 PM |
|
I don't understand where is this "33-sync" version...also, the previous one (the last experimental one) didn't work on my system, said it is a 16bit application and it doesn't work on 64bits.
|
|
|
|
|
Mesquito
Member
Offline
Activity: 322
Merit: 10
I'm creative and work how you need for ETH and BTC
|
|
December 03, 2018, 02:54:56 PM |
|
Is your miner open-sourced, available and constantly updated on GitHub/GitLab/etc?
|
|
|
|
|
maedonald
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 2
Merit: 0
|
|
December 03, 2018, 05:30:53 PM |
|
0.33-sync work perfect than 0.33b5 my rig -RX474 with thread 464 -RX588 with thread 928 get more hashrate 200 than b5 without hash drop issue Thank alot JCE  |
|
|
|
|
JCE-Miner (OP)
Member
Offline
Activity: 350
Merit: 22
|
|
December 03, 2018, 10:10:30 PM |
|
Hi all, looks like most of you appreciate the 0.33-sync, fine  I'll turn it into the official 0.33b8 soon @Unclwish: did at least the -sync solved your problem of stuck thread? I don't understand where is this "33-sync" version That's the lone .exe in the github page. Ensure it doesn't get blocked by an antivirus. It's a 64-bits app as before. I suggest you to contact cryptunit team to get listed in their website good idea, i'll send them an email. They should also add Cast (good miner so far) and remove Claymore (obsolete). JCE, b5+ to sync versions requires more power than b4 version yes, measured +20% speed and +6% power on RX. Still a good deal  "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 16, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 3, "multi_hash":944 }, That's very close to the max memory, and OpenCL may not let you alloc all in one thread. I strongly advise you use two threads with multi_hash = 464, and on the -sync version the double threads give really more speed. Only very old cards like HD7000 may mine better with one thread. Also try with beta = 8 for speed, it may be a bit better or worse, depends on the cards. Strange question from myself: i just plugged back my HD6950 that hasn't mined (except for quick tests) since the golden age of Claymore 9.7 and so far i cannot use multi_hash over 256 (=512Mb), while i got report from GitHub support tickets the value 864 was good. Did somebody managed to allocate >512M on those cards? I'm still using the drivers 15.11 on win8.1 i used with the card it replaced (a 7900), not tried yet to use the recommended 14.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
UnclWish
|
|
December 04, 2018, 04:53:21 AM
Last edit: December 04, 2018, 05:08:02 AM by UnclWish |
|
@Unclwish: did at least the -sync solved your problem of stuck thread? JCE, b5+ to sync versions requires more power than b4 version yes, measured +20% speed and +6% power on RX. Still a good deal Strange question from myself: i just plugged back my HD6950 that hasn't mined (except for quick tests) since the golden age of Claymore 9.7 and so far i cannot use multi_hash over 256 (=512Mb), while i got report from GitHub support tickets the value 864 was good. Did somebody managed to allocate >512M on those cards? I'm still using the drivers 15.11 on win8.1 i used with the card it replaced (a 7900), not tried yet to use the recommended 14.4 Yes, thread stuck bug is gone. Now trying to undestand why my RX 580 cards didn't have stable speed long time... On old cards. Maybe my 270X 4Gb with availible only 3,5Gb for OpenCL can use all 4Gb somehow? Who allready have good tests of sync version - please say what time need to recieve max speed on RX 580 8Gb. I want to spend some tests, but I need to know how much to wait every time... 1st try - rise a bit voltage on GPU cores - 12 minutes - no result - speed not max... |
|
|
|
|
lebuawu2
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 176
Merit: 2
|
|
December 04, 2018, 06:09:25 AM |
|
@Unclwish: did at least the -sync solved your problem of stuck thread? JCE, b5+ to sync versions requires more power than b4 version yes, measured +20% speed and +6% power on RX. Still a good deal Strange question from myself: i just plugged back my HD6950 that hasn't mined (except for quick tests) since the golden age of Claymore 9.7 and so far i cannot use multi_hash over 256 (=512Mb), while i got report from GitHub support tickets the value 864 was good. Did somebody managed to allocate >512M on those cards? I'm still using the drivers 15.11 on win8.1 i used with the card it replaced (a 7900), not tried yet to use the recommended 14.4 Yes, thread stuck bug is gone. Now trying to undestand why my RX 580 cards didn't have stable speed long time... On old cards. Maybe my 270X 4Gb with availible only 3,5Gb for OpenCL can use all 4Gb somehow? Who allready have good tests of sync version - please say what time need to recieve max speed on RX 580 8Gb. I want to spend some tests, but I need to know how much to wait every time... 1st try - rise a bit voltage on GPU cores - 12 minutes - no result - speed not max... Hi UnclWish, I already explain even without warm up my rig with 8 GPU RX 580 8GB on first print hash rate it already reach max on all GPU. Windows 10 Build 1709 AMD Driver 18.6.1 2 thread multi_hash 944 Maybe in your case because you have latest Windows 10 and latest AMD Driver. +-----------------------------------------------+
| JC Expert Cryptonote CPU+GPU Miner 0.33b-sync |
+-----------------------------------------------+
For Windows 64-bits
Detecting OpenCL-capable GPUs...
Found GPU 0, with:
Vendor: Intel
Processor: Intel(R) HD Graphics 510
Device: ff:ff
Compute-Units: 12
Cache Memory: 256 KB
Local Memory: 64 KB
Global Memory: 3139 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Found GPU 1, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Ellesmere
Device: 01:00
Compute-Units: 36
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 8192 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Found GPU 2, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Ellesmere
Device: 02:00
Compute-Units: 36
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 8192 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Found GPU 3, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Ellesmere
Device: 03:00
Compute-Units: 36
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 8192 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Found GPU 4, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Ellesmere
Device: 04:00
Compute-Units: 36
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 8192 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Found GPU 5, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Ellesmere
Device: 05:00
Compute-Units: 36
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 8192 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Found GPU 6, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Ellesmere
Device: 06:00
Compute-Units: 36
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 8192 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Found GPU 7, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Ellesmere
Device: 09:00
Compute-Units: 36
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 8192 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Found GPU 8, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Ellesmere
Device: 0b:00
Compute-Units: 36
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 8192 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Preparing 16 Mining Threads...
+-- Thread 0 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 1 |
| Multi-hash: 944 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 16 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 1 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 1 |
| Multi-hash: 944 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 16 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 2 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 2 |
| Multi-hash: 944 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 16 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 3 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 2 |
| Multi-hash: 944 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 16 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 4 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 3 |
| Multi-hash: 944 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 16 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 5 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 3 |
| Multi-hash: 944 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 16 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 6 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 4 |
| Multi-hash: 944 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 16 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 7 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 4 |
| Multi-hash: 944 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 16 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 8 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 5 |
| Multi-hash: 944 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 16 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 9 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 5 |
| Multi-hash: 944 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 16 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 10 config -----------------------+
| Run on GPU: 6 |
| Multi-hash: 944 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 16 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 11 config -----------------------+
| Run on GPU: 6 |
| Multi-hash: 944 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 16 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 12 config -----------------------+
| Run on GPU: 7 |
| Multi-hash: 944 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 16 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 13 config -----------------------+
| Run on GPU: 7 |
| Multi-hash: 944 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 16 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 14 config -----------------------+
| Run on GPU: 8 |
| Multi-hash: 944 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 16 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 15 config -----------------------+
| Run on GPU: 8 |
| Multi-hash: 944 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 16 |
+-------------------------------------------+
Cryptonight Variation: Cryptonight-Heavy
Starting GPU Thread 0, on GPU 1
Created OpenCL Context for GPU 1 at 0000023faf34c790
Created OpenCL Thread 0 Command-Queue for GPU 1 at 0000023faf34c8f0
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 0
Allocating big 3776MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 0...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 0...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 0 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 1, on GPU 1
Created OpenCL Thread 1 Command-Queue for GPU 1 at 0000023faf4ea5f0
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 1
Allocating big 3776MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 1...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 1...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 1 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 2, on GPU 2
Created OpenCL Context for GPU 2 at 0000023faf12cbc0
Created OpenCL Thread 2 Command-Queue for GPU 2 at 0000023fb404a6e0
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 2
Allocating big 3776MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 2...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 2...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 2 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 3, on GPU 2
Created OpenCL Thread 3 Command-Queue for GPU 2 at 0000023fb404a980
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 3
Allocating big 3776MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 3...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 3...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 3 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 4, on GPU 3
Created OpenCL Context for GPU 3 at 0000023fb3ff6820
Created OpenCL Thread 4 Command-Queue for GPU 3 at 0000023fb404ac20
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 4
Allocating big 3776MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 4...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 4...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 4 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 5, on GPU 3
Created OpenCL Thread 5 Command-Queue for GPU 3 at 0000023fb404a590
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 5
Allocating big 3776MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 5...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 5...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 5 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 6, on GPU 4
Created OpenCL Context for GPU 4 at 0000023fb3ff7060
Created OpenCL Thread 6 Command-Queue for GPU 4 at 0000023fbff90a20
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 6
Allocating big 3776MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 6...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 6...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 6 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 7, on GPU 4
Created OpenCL Thread 7 Command-Queue for GPU 4 at 0000023fbff915f0
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 7
Allocating big 3776MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 7...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 7...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 7 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 8, on GPU 5
Created OpenCL Context for GPU 5 at 0000023fb3ff6980
Created OpenCL Thread 8 Command-Queue for GPU 5 at 0000023fbff900f0
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 8
Allocating big 3776MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 8...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 8...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 8 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 9, on GPU 5
Created OpenCL Thread 9 Command-Queue for GPU 5 at 0000023fbff90cc0
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 9
Allocating big 3776MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 9...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 9...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 9 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 10, on GPU 6
Created OpenCL Context for GPU 6 at 0000023fcda784b0
Created OpenCL Thread 10 Command-Queue for GPU 6 at 0000023fbff90240
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 10
Allocating big 3776MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 10...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 10...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 10 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 11, on GPU 6
Created OpenCL Thread 11 Command-Queue for GPU 6 at 0000023fbff90f60
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 11
Allocating big 3776MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 11...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 11...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 11 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 12, on GPU 7
Created OpenCL Context for GPU 7 at 0000023fcda78b90
Created OpenCL Thread 12 Command-Queue for GPU 7 at 0000023fbff90b70
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 12
Allocating big 3776MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 12...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 12...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 12 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 13, on GPU 7
Created OpenCL Thread 13 Command-Queue for GPU 7 at 0000023fbff91c80
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 13
Allocating big 3776MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 13...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 13...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 13 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 14, on GPU 8
Created OpenCL Context for GPU 8 at 0000023fcda79110
Created OpenCL Thread 14 Command-Queue for GPU 8 at 0000023fce3cc750
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 14
Allocating big 3776MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 14...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 14...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 14 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 15, on GPU 8
Created OpenCL Thread 15 Command-Queue for GPU 8 at 0000023fce3cc8a0
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 15
Allocating big 3776MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 15...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 15...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 15 compiled.
GPU Watchdog minimum hashrate: 100
GPU Warmup disabled
Devfee for GPU is 0.9%
23:08:31 | Loki (LOK) Mining session starts!
During mining time, press:
h display hashrate for each mining thread.
r display full report.
p pause all.
u pause CPUs.
0-F pause GPU 0-15.
t GPU temperature and fan speed.
q quit.
23:08:31 | GPU Compute allocation starts at 80% and reaches 100% after ~1min,
23:08:31 | during this time, the hashrate may be unstable and inconsistent.
23:08:31 | Let the miner warm-up if you're tuning for performance.
23:08:32 | Connecting to mining pool sg.loki.miner.rocks:5555 ...
23:08:32 | Connected to pool. Now logging in...
23:08:32 | Successfuly logged as LK8CGQ17G9R3ys3Xf33wCeViD2B95jgdpjAhcRsjuheJ784dumXn7g3RPAzedWpFq364jJKYL9dkQ8mY66sZG9BiD26Xb3NXBMT3hTiNGd.80000
23:08:32 | Pool changes Difficulty to 80000.
23:08:37 | GPU 3 Thread 4 Lane 236 finds a Share, value 80000
23:08:37 | Accepted by the pool in 78 ms.
23:08:39 | GPU 4 Thread 6 Lane 914 finds a Share, value 80000
23:08:39 | Accepted by the pool in 81 ms.
23:08:54 | GPU 3 Thread 4 Lane 797 finds a Share, value 80000
23:08:55 | Accepted by the pool in 109 ms.
23:08:55 | GPU 3 Thread 5 Lane 227 finds a Share, value 80000
23:08:55 | Accepted by the pool in 47 ms.
23:09:01 | Pool sends a new Job.
23:09:02 | Hashrate GPU Thread 0: 624.01 h/s
23:09:02 | Hashrate GPU Thread 1: 623.43 h/s - Total GPU 1: 1247.43 h/s
23:09:02 | Hashrate GPU Thread 2: 589.42 h/s
23:09:02 | Hashrate GPU Thread 3: 585.70 h/s - Total GPU 2: 1175.12 h/s
23:09:02 | Hashrate GPU Thread 4: 585.70 h/s
23:09:02 | Hashrate GPU Thread 5: 589.54 h/s - Total GPU 3: 1175.24 h/s
23:09:02 | Hashrate GPU Thread 6: 555.69 h/s
23:09:02 | Hashrate GPU Thread 7: 553.98 h/s - Total GPU 4: 1109.66 h/s
23:09:02 | Hashrate GPU Thread 8: 585.70 h/s
23:09:02 | Hashrate GPU Thread 9: 591.36 h/s - Total GPU 5: 1177.06 h/s
23:09:02 | Hashrate GPU Thread 10: 588.01 h/s
23:09:02 | Hashrate GPU Thread 11: 585.70 h/s - Total GPU 6: 1173.70 h/s
23:09:02 | Hashrate GPU Thread 12: 623.43 h/s
23:09:02 | Hashrate GPU Thread 13: 624.01 h/s - Total GPU 7: 1247.43 h/s
23:09:02 | Hashrate GPU Thread 14: 578.27 h/s
23:09:02 | Hashrate GPU Thread 15: 578.39 h/s - Total GPU 8: 1156.66 h/s
23:09:02 | Total: 9462.27 h/s - Max: 9462.27 h/s
23:09:10 | GPU 5 Thread 9 Lane 521 finds a Share, value 80000
23:09:10 | Accepted by the pool in 63 ms.
23:09:10 | GPU 1: Temp: 58C - Fan: 0% -- Shares: Good: 0 Bad: 0
23:09:10 | GPU 2: Temp: 57C - Fan: 56% -- Shares: Good: 0 Bad: 0
23:09:10 | GPU 3: Temp: 57C - Fan: 57% -- Shares: Good: 3 Bad: 0
23:09:10 | GPU 4: Temp: 57C - Fan: 56% -- Shares: Good: 1 Bad: 0
23:09:10 | GPU 5: Temp: 52C - Fan: 55% -- Shares: Good: 1 Bad: 0
23:09:10 | GPU 6: Temp: 53C - Fan: 56% -- Shares: Good: 0 Bad: 0
23:09:10 | GPU 7: Temp: 59C - Fan: 44% -- Shares: Good: 0 Bad: 0
23:09:10 | GPU 8: Temp: 57C - Fan: 52% -- Shares: Good: 0 Bad: 0
23:09:23 | Pool sends a new Job.
23:09:32 | GPU 3 Thread 4 Lane 299 finds a Share, value 80000
23:09:32 | Accepted by the pool in 63 ms.
23:09:34 | Pause All
|
|
|
|
|
_ap_
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
|
|
December 04, 2018, 07:18:06 AM |
|
forget the b7 and try the new experimental (read: very untested) B-sync GPU
That's the lone .exe in the github page.
1. Stable and fast hashrate
2. new parameter --no-monitor to disable fan/temp monitoring (the purple report)
3. various optims for some cards and some algos, expect about +0.5%
4. Fees still 0.9%
so far it burns like fire on my rigs, i hope it really fixes all the hashrate and warmup problems.
with: - cpu: working perfect - integral gpu: working perfect - 8gb rx 580: working perfect - 4gb rx570: after pool login, the miner stopped and i got: "Press any key to continue..." message my config: "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 16, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 3, "multi_hash":944 }, any idea? *update: algo = bittube thanks! 4gb GPU multi_hash should be lower for 2 thread about 464 or 480. Maybe he use 1 thread? He didn't copy 2 strings... yes, only 1 thread, and this config worked with all previous version. Try with 928. I tried, but nothing. Then I switched to 2 thread mode, and with 464 values working now. Before the 2 thread mode didn't work.. :-O This version is very stable. This is the best version so far. |
|
|
|
|
|
UnclWish
|
|
December 04, 2018, 08:00:33 AM |
|
Hi UnclWish,
I already explain even without warm up my rig with 8 GPU RX 580 8GB on first print hash rate it already reach max on all GPU.
Windows 10 Build 1709
AMD Driver 18.6.1
2 thread multi_hash 944
Maybe in your case because you have latest Windows 10 and latest AMD Driver.
Maybe you're right. I have 1803 Windows 10 and 18.11.2 drivers... Still playing with GPU voltages to check... Or maybe your cards have good samsung memory... Or maybe your memory straps better than my... What memory type and clocks/voltages you use? What memory straps? JCE, can drivers affect that way? |
|
|
|
|
lebuawu2
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 176
Merit: 2
|
|
December 04, 2018, 09:19:57 AM |
|
Hi UnclWish,
I already explain even without warm up my rig with 8 GPU RX 580 8GB on first print hash rate it already reach max on all GPU.
Windows 10 Build 1709
AMD Driver 18.6.1
2 thread multi_hash 944
Maybe in your case because you have latest Windows 10 and latest AMD Driver.
Maybe you're right. I have 1803 Windows 10 and 18.11.2 drivers... Still playing with GPU voltages to check... Or maybe your cards have good samsung memory... Or maybe your memory straps better than my... What memory type and clocks/voltages you use? What memory straps? JCE, can drivers affect that way? 2 samsung memory (GPU 1 & GPU 7) CC 1250/890 MC 2000/890 and 6 hynix memory (the rest), GPU 4 is really bad can only set CC 1250/890 MC 2020/890 GPU 2,3,5,6 CC 1250/890 MC 2100/890 GPU 8 CC 1250/890 MC 2080/890. samsung memory strap from PBE 1.6.7. hynix memory strap from doktor83. |
|
|
|
|
|
UnclWish
|
|
December 04, 2018, 09:28:30 AM |
|
Hi UnclWish,
I already explain even without warm up my rig with 8 GPU RX 580 8GB on first print hash rate it already reach max on all GPU.
Windows 10 Build 1709
AMD Driver 18.6.1
2 thread multi_hash 944
Maybe in your case because you have latest Windows 10 and latest AMD Driver.
Maybe you're right. I have 1803 Windows 10 and 18.11.2 drivers... Still playing with GPU voltages to check... Or maybe your cards have good samsung memory... Or maybe your memory straps better than my... What memory type and clocks/voltages you use? What memory straps? JCE, can drivers affect that way? 2 samsung memory (GPU 1 & GPU 7) CC 1250/890 MC 2000/890 and 6 hynix memory (the rest), GPU 4 is really bad can only set CC 1250/890 MC 2020/890 GPU 2,3,5,6 CC 1250/890 MC 2100/890 GPU 8 CC 1250/890 MC 2080/890. samsung memory strap from PBE 1.6.7. hynix memory strap from doktor83. Thanks for info. You use high memory voltage - 890 mV... I use 825-850 mV for clocks near 2000MHz... Can you share your hynix memory strap from doctor83? |
|
|
|
|
lebuawu2
Jr. Member
Offline
Activity: 176
Merit: 2
|
|
December 04, 2018, 09:38:55 AM |
|
Hi UnclWish,
I already explain even without warm up my rig with 8 GPU RX 580 8GB on first print hash rate it already reach max on all GPU.
Windows 10 Build 1709
AMD Driver 18.6.1
2 thread multi_hash 944
Maybe in your case because you have latest Windows 10 and latest AMD Driver.
Maybe you're right. I have 1803 Windows 10 and 18.11.2 drivers... Still playing with GPU voltages to check... Or maybe your cards have good samsung memory... Or maybe your memory straps better than my... What memory type and clocks/voltages you use? What memory straps? JCE, can drivers affect that way? 2 samsung memory (GPU 1 & GPU 7) CC 1250/890 MC 2000/890 and 6 hynix memory (the rest), GPU 4 is really bad can only set CC 1250/890 MC 2020/890 GPU 2,3,5,6 CC 1250/890 MC 2100/890 GPU 8 CC 1250/890 MC 2080/890. samsung memory strap from PBE 1.6.7. hynix memory strap from doktor83. Thanks for info. You use high memory voltage - 890 mV... I use 825-850 mV for clocks near 2000MHz... Can you share your hynix memory strap from doctor83? you can get from doktor83 thread here : https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=3167363.msg35676403#msg35676403 |
|
|
|
|
|
UnclWish
|
|
December 04, 2018, 12:48:26 PM
Last edit: December 04, 2018, 02:56:53 PM by UnclWish |
|
Oh, thanks! I know this straps... Meanwhile, doctor83 released new version of his miner... Wrote that he did stable high heavy algo speed on RX 4xx/5xx cards supporting latest drivers. And he stopped to use binary kernels as before he did, and new fast kernel compiling... All as on JCE miner... After my work would try his miner... On JCE sync version I can't still recieve stable max speed for a long time... Increasing core and memory voltages didn't helped. Lowering multi_hash parameters also didn't helped. After 15-20 minutes speed can be max (but not always), but after some time it start to fluctuate and drops to about 1 kh/s. EDIT: Wow! doctor83 made it! His miner last version have stable speed on heavy algo as rock! And on heavy mode 3 only a bit (about 10 h/s) slower than JCE. But his devfee 0,85%... So... If I can't recieve stable max speed on JCE, I would forced to use his miner... |
|
|
|
|
|
maxfunky
|
|
December 04, 2018, 03:58:43 PM |
|
proxy/socks : possible, but i've tons of other tasks more priority : dualshare, Linux version, AMD-GPU version...
JCE netcode works the exact same way than claymore, its netcode is optimized (and restricted) to direct-connect to pools on internet, with or without SSL. Period. No support of proxies, socks, local pools etc. Not even it has a HTTP server to broadcast hashrate, just log file at best. But it can run on a VM.
And even if i add proxy support, i'd like to provide integrated proxy support (JCE being proxy of other JCEs) because i don't like how xmrig-proxy is made, it re-uses the (bad) way Nicehash implement their own proxies, and so xmrig-proxy is not compatible with Nicehash, and not compatible with non-Nicehash miners.
It would be great if your miner could support socks proxy the same way cpuminer does with the -x cli option..  -x SOCKS5://127.0.0.1:9050 |
|
|
|
|
|
UnclWish
|
|
December 04, 2018, 04:06:39 PM |
|
I noticed that speed start to flactuate after recieving new job... Maybe it's nicehash problem...
|
|
|
|
|
JCE-Miner (OP)
Member
Offline
Activity: 350
Merit: 22
|
|
December 04, 2018, 08:52:49 PM
Last edit: December 04, 2018, 09:53:07 PM by JCE-Miner |
|
I noticed that speed start to flactuate after recieving new job... Maybe it's nicehash problem...
Why didn't you say so? i've a special sync for nicehash, with dedicated netcode (Nicehash is a lot more netcode-aggressive than other pools). Please try on a normal pool, if it gets stable, so here's the problem. Maybe SRB doesn't have that nicehash special, so in this precise case, it avoids the problem. I'm preparing v8, which will be like -sync, but :done, online is the 0.33b8 GPUCrash on old HD cards fixed (was a typo in my old card's code)
Light optim for modern cards on Heavy/forks
edit: ok I found my bug on Nicehash netcode, but too late to fix in b8, that will be for b9 meanwhile please test on a normal pool |
|
|
|
|
|
