tdxminer lyra2z/XZC Miner for AMD GPUs on Linux

[N2DCRYPT]

Lyra2z > Lyra2Rev2, no question. For multiple reasons. 3% is quite fair in my opinion, for the reasons you mention. I don't think it's too high to incentivize someone ripping your kernels and releasing their own with a lower fee either. Good middle ground.

I've got most of my machines on Windows (although there are lots of things I hate about Windows!) simply because of the better overclocking utilities. However, I'm excited about this miner, so I'll pull a few cards and fire up a linux machine and see how the miner runs. Hopefully I'll get to it this weekend, will report back when I do!

[1715560668]

1715560668

[1715560668]

1715560668

[1715560668]

1715560668

[1715560668]

1715560668

[kerney666]

Reading through this thread for the first time, I only saw your announcement on the ZCoin subreddit earlier. A polite request though, with all due respect please stop the bs hints about ripping your kernels, I haven't even downloaded your miner, even less so tried to dump your kernels. I was just as surprised as you were about the weird coincidence that two very similar AMD lyra2z-related announcements were made within a friggin' day after months of silence. Furthermore, I don't know when you published on github, but otherwise all your announcements that I've seen were written after(!) my post here. It's a bit of a stretch that I somehow would have found your miner before your first announcement, ripped the kernels, massaged them into a Windows sgminer and made a wild announcement myself, like you wouldn't be able to release the same packaging yourself at some point .

As stated, my implementation was written bottom up in pure GCN ASM (well, not the Blake part) and has been running on Windows rigs for a number of months. No ROCm dependencies. We probably made the same analysis, that lyra2z was very far from well understood and a very good fit for what an AMD GCN CU can do with DPP ops. Your miner def has had me become less interested in releasing it public though, I'd rather keep the extra ~15% edge I seem to have for now.

Cheers, K

[todxx]

Reading through this thread for the first time, I only saw your announcement on the ZCoin subreddit earlier. A polite request though, with all due respect please stop the bs hints about ripping your kernels, I haven't even downloaded your miner, even less so tried to dump your kernels. I was just as surprised as you were about the weird coincidence that two very similar AMD lyra2z-related announcements were made within a friggin' day after months of silence. Furthermore, I don't know when you published on github, but otherwise all your announcements that I've seen were written after(!) my post here. It's a bit of a stretch that I somehow would have found your miner before your first announcement, ripped the kernels, massaged them into a Windows sgminer and made a wild announcement myself, like you wouldn't be able to release the same packaging yourself at some point .

As stated, my implementation was written bottom up in pure GCN ASM (well, not the Blake part) and has been running on Windows rigs for a number of months. No ROCm dependencies. We probably made the same analysis, that lyra2z was very far from well understood and a very good fit for what an AMD GCN CU can do with DPP ops. Your miner def has had me become less interested in releasing it public though, I'd rather keep the extra ~15% edge I seem to have for now.

Cheers, K

Hey kerney, thanks for clearing the air on this.  I admittedly over-reacted a bit by insinuating that you may have taken the kernels from my miner.  Right after my initial release on github I had ask a couple people if they could test it out, before my reddit announcement.  One of them directly told me that he was trying to reverse engineer the kernels.  When I saw that your post went up half a day after this interaction, I jumped to conclusions.

My apologies.  Also kudos to you for writing a lyra2 implementation entirely in assembly.  I know how much of a pain it was for me to do it in opencl c with inline assembly, so I imagine it was doubly so doing it entirely in assembly.

I don't understand why this release discouraged you from releasing your own miner.  Wouldn't releasing a miner with a dev fee would be more profitable than having a 15% advantage just on your own rigs?  In either case, I think the community would appreciate and benefit from having two competing AMD miners for lyra2z, and I personally welcome the competition.

[Iamtutut]

Guys, one miner is running on Linux, the other one on windows. If AMD mining community could use BOTH, it would just be perfect.

[crocozino]

crap! there is no windows version (((
this is a fail for me((
the performance wise the miner looks amazing showing crazy fast speeds and nice improvements! sadly, sadly very sadly now windows version
and so all owners of vegas with linux PCs can enjoy good profits now !!!
   

[zot57]

Is there restrictions to mining cards per rig? I thought I heard it is for 1 or max 2 gpu's?

And one more vote for windows miner.

[todxx]

Is there restrictions to mining cards per rig? I thought I heard it is for 1 or max 2 gpu's?

And one more vote for windows miner.

The code is written to support up to 16 GPUs, though I don't think most motherboards/BIOS's/operating systems can handle that many.
I have only tested it with up to 2 GPUs.  If anyone is having issues running with more GPUs, I'd like to hear about it.  If there are bugs in the miner preventing running with more GPUs I'd love to squash them.

I'm working on a windows version, but it will probably be a week or two before I have something to release.

[ol92]

Reading through this thread for the first time, I only saw your announcement on the ZCoin subreddit earlier. A polite request though, with all due respect please stop the bs hints about ripping your kernels, I haven't even downloaded your miner, even less so tried to dump your kernels. I was just as surprised as you were about the weird coincidence that two very similar AMD lyra2z-related announcements were made within a friggin' day after months of silence. Furthermore, I don't know when you published on github, but otherwise all your announcements that I've seen were written after(!) my post here. It's a bit of a stretch that I somehow would have found your miner before your first announcement, ripped the kernels, massaged them into a Windows sgminer and made a wild announcement myself, like you wouldn't be able to release the same packaging yourself at some point .

As stated, my implementation was written bottom up in pure GCN ASM (well, not the Blake part) and has been running on Windows rigs for a number of months. No ROCm dependencies. We probably made the same analysis, that lyra2z was very far from well understood and a very good fit for what an AMD GCN CU can do with DPP ops. Your miner def has had me become less interested in releasing it public though, I'd rather keep the extra ~15% edge I seem to have for now.

Cheers, K

Hey kerney, thanks for clearing the air on this.  I admittedly over-reacted a bit by insinuating that you may have taken the kernels from my miner.  Right after my initial release on github I had ask a couple people if they could test it out, before my reddit announcement.  One of them directly told me that he was trying to reverse engineer the kernels.  When I saw that your post went up half a day after this interaction, I jumped to conclusions.

My apologies.  Also kudos to you for writing a lyra2 implementation entirely in assembly.  I know how much of a pain it was for me to do it in opencl c with inline assembly, so I imagine it was doubly so doing it entirely in assembly.

I don't understand why this release discouraged you from releasing your own miner.  Wouldn't releasing a miner with a dev fee would be more profitable than having a 15% advantage just on your own rigs?  In either case, I think the community would appreciate and benefit from having two competing AMD miners for lyra2z, and I personally welcome the competition.

I agree: I appreciate what you are doing for the community. A competitive miner with a dev fee somewhat reasonable is a win win situation. Thanks for both of you.

[kerney666]

Hey todxx, my user being a Newbie I can't send PMs to you here, can you enable the setting? Yourself being a Newbie and all  .

[todxx]

I didn't even know that setting existed.  Setting changed, fire away .

[MinedTangerine]

Tested on Linux today (fresh install).

- RX 580: 3.2 MH/s
- RX 470: 2.5 MH/s

I am sure I could do better but I have no experience with overclocking under Linux. My rigs are Win 10, so eagerly awaiting the Windows version.
The miner worked without flaws, but I did not test for extended periods of time.

[BlackPrapor]

Hi,

Is there anyway someone could upload a linux image with this installed? It's quite simple using this http://hddguru.com/software/HDD-Raw-Copy-Tool/

Also interested in a working out of a box version to test this miner.

[eurospeedy]

Sounds like great news for ADM owners.
I have question about rx580. Is there any performance difference between 4Gb and 8Gb versions or hashrate is the same for both?

[kamillenteo]

Is there restrictions to mining cards per rig? I thought I heard it is for 1 or max 2 gpu's?

And one more vote for windows miner.

The code is written to support up to 16 GPUs, though I don't think most motherboards/BIOS's/operating systems can handle that many.
I have only tested it with up to 2 GPUs.  If anyone is having issues running with more GPUs, I'd like to hear about it.  If there are bugs in the miner preventing running with more GPUs I'd love to squash them.

I'm working on a windows version, but it will probably be a week or two before I have something to release.

There is a limit on how many GPUs are supported in ROCm. It has something to do with PCI atomics and is pretty much hardware based.
Any way we could use AMDGPU Pro drivers for Vegas with your miner in the future?

[dragonmike]

Tested on Linux today (fresh install).

- RX 580: 3.2 MH/s
- RX 470: 2.5 MH/s

I am sure I could do better but I have no experience with overclocking under Linux. My rigs are Win 10, so eagerly awaiting the Windows version.
The miner worked without flaws, but I did not test for extended periods of time.

Out of interest, what are these cards achieving with SGminer? I haven't tried myself, I'm usually quite reluctant to experiment with my AMD rigs are they are my very stable cash cows mining ETH...

[buraz11]

around 0.5 mhs

[principino1984]

I will try with 4 or 5 rx580 this week. I will let you know.

Thanks for your job

[todxx]

Tested on Linux today (fresh install).

- RX 580: 3.2 MH/s
- RX 470: 2.5 MH/s

I am sure I could do better but I have no experience with overclocking under Linux. My rigs are Win 10, so eagerly awaiting the Windows version.
The miner worked without flaws, but I did not test for extended periods of time.

Thanks for posting your results.  It's nice to have some confirmation that the kernels scale well on RX 470 GPUs.  The GPU kernels should scale relatively linearly with the number of CU and core clock speed.  They should not be affected very much by memory speed.

Sounds like great news for ADM owners.
I have question about rx580. Is there any performance difference between 4Gb and 8Gb versions or hashrate is the same for both?

The hash rates should be the same for both.  The GPU kernels do not use very much memory, and they only use it for intermediate state, so memory capacity and clock should have little impact.

I will try with 4 or 5 rx580 this week. I will let you know.

Thanks for your job

Thanks principino!  It will be nice to have some feedback on how the miner runs with more than a couple GPUs at a time.  I look forward to your results!

Tested on Linux today (fresh install).

- RX 580: 3.2 MH/s
- RX 470: 2.5 MH/s

I am sure I could do better but I have no experience with overclocking under Linux. My rigs are Win 10, so eagerly awaiting the Windows version.
The miner worked without flaws, but I did not test for extended periods of time.

Out of interest, what are these cards achieving with SGminer? I haven't tried myself, I'm usually quite reluctant to experiment with my AMD rigs are they are my very stable cash cows mining ETH...

around 0.5 mhs

The 0.5Mh/s number is about what I remember getting on sgminer the last time I ran it.  I think with some tuning you can get to around 1.5 Mh/s on a Vega 64.

As for switching over your stable rigs to this miner, please keep in mind that this is still a beta release.  I do not promise that it will be stable on all hardware.  I've done my best to test it for stability on the hardware I have and so far I have not received any reports of instability, but I've only received feedback from a handful of people.  I would suggest slowly switching your rigs over one at a time, making sure that they are stable along the way.  I don't want to ruin anybody's profits because of potential bugs in the miner.  Also remember to check your GPU temperatures as the miner does not check them, and will continue mining even if they exceed safe limits.

[NisamRobot]

running 16 hours so far without any issues.

rx480 1106/1750 ~ 3 Mh/s
rx470 1095/1650 ~ 2.6Mh/s
rx580 1300/1000 ~ 3.5 Mh/s

Funny thing is when i overclock hashrate would decrease, ie rx480@1280/1900 would run 2.6 Mh/s, rx580@1380/2000 ~ 3.1 Mh/s. So i let it run on default clock, in auto DPM state. Not so easy to OC under linux.

[crocozino]

hello todxx
I read from your first post that to adopt your miner under windows would require about one month, but it is not clear will you do that?!
yes, this is time consuming deal, but the number of miners who use windows is about ten times more then people using linux..
so it should be very profitable for as a developer, cause more miner = more developer fee...