[GUIDE] GridSeed 5-Chip USB, Blade & Black Miner Support/Tuning

[sandor111]

I'm actually having the same old problem with 1.0a: too many rejects (compared to 0.9c). Setting --no-refresh seems to make it worse (will keep running for a while longer to confirm this).

Don't use --no-refresh if you are having issues with rejects, it does make it worse as it only sends new work when a new block is detected, as opposed to always sending new work to the GC3355.
It's a command line option specifically for the Blade users.

OK. I've switched to another pool (ghash) and cpuminer is not giving high rejects. But, difficulty stays @ 16, which is lower than I'm used to seeing - is that anything to worry about? More traffic? (noob questions I know)

I know the admins @ GiveMeCoins tested cpuminer with their pool but I don't think they tried the Windows builds, FWIW.

That's no issue, the bandwidth consumed when mining is relatively low.
BTW, there is no difference between Windows build or the others. I still stand by that it's a pool issue, because I'm getting 0.2-1% reject rate on any pool I tested except that one.

[RowanX]

I'm actually having the same old problem with 1.0a: too many rejects (compared to 0.9c). Setting --no-refresh seems to make it worse (will keep running for a while longer to confirm this).

Don't use --no-refresh if you are having issues with rejects, it does make it worse as it only sends new work when a new block is detected, as opposed to always sending new work to the GC3355.
It's a command line option specifically for the Blade users.

OK. I've switched to another pool (ghash) and cpuminer is not giving high rejects. But, difficulty stays @ 16, which is lower than I'm used to seeing - is that anything to worry about? More traffic? (noob questions I know)

I know the admins @ GiveMeCoins tested cpuminer with their pool but I don't think they tried the Windows builds, FWIW.

That's no issue, the bandwidth consumed when mining is relatively low.
BTW, there is no difference between Windows build or the others. I still stand by that it's a pool issue, because I'm getting 0.2-1% reject rate on any pool I tested except that one.

Sure I see what you mean. Its just curious that 0.9c works fine with GiveMeCoins pool.

[chinatom]

I'm actually having the same old problem with 1.0a: too many rejects (compared to 0.9c). Setting --no-refresh seems to make it worse (will keep running for a while longer to confirm this).

Don't use --no-refresh if you are having issues with rejects, it does make it worse as it only sends new work when a new block is detected, as opposed to always sending new work to the GC3355.
It's a command line option specifically for the Blade users.

OK. I've switched to another pool (ghash) and cpuminer is not giving high rejects. But, difficulty stays @ 16, which is lower than I'm used to seeing - is that anything to worry about? More traffic? (noob questions I know)

I know the admins @ GiveMeCoins tested cpuminer with their pool but I don't think they tried the Windows builds, FWIW.

That's no issue, the bandwidth consumed when mining is relatively low.
BTW, there is no difference between Windows build or the others. I still stand by that it's a pool issue, because I'm getting 0.2-1% reject rate on any pool I tested except that one.

nice to meet u~ greater writer .    i have tow pis usbminiminer and  one blade , i can run it use the v1.0a  together?     thx .  

[sandor111]

I'm actually having the same old problem with 1.0a: too many rejects (compared to 0.9c). Setting --no-refresh seems to make it worse (will keep running for a while longer to confirm this).

Don't use --no-refresh if you are having issues with rejects, it does make it worse as it only sends new work when a new block is detected, as opposed to always sending new work to the GC3355.
It's a command line option specifically for the Blade users.

OK. I've switched to another pool (ghash) and cpuminer is not giving high rejects. But, difficulty stays @ 16, which is lower than I'm used to seeing - is that anything to worry about? More traffic? (noob questions I know)

I know the admins @ GiveMeCoins tested cpuminer with their pool but I don't think they tried the Windows builds, FWIW.

That's no issue, the bandwidth consumed when mining is relatively low.
BTW, there is no difference between Windows build or the others. I still stand by that it's a pool issue, because I'm getting 0.2-1% reject rate on any pool I tested except that one.

nice to meet u~ greater writer .    i have tow pis usbminiminer and  one blade , i can run it use the v1.0a  together?     thx .  

Sure, you can use it together.

[ManeBjorn]

Excellent work Sandor.
I used cpuminer in my review of the Blade because it worked so well.
http://www.cryptocoinsnews.com/news/5-2-mhs-scrypt-miner-review-gridseed-blade/2014/05/08

The constant improvements have been great.  I had version g running all night and I got up this morning to it running perfectly still.
Thanks again for the hard work.
 

[sandor111]

For maximum performance, try the latest binaries from dropbox. 2-5Kh/s per miner can be gained overall.

[CartmanSPC]

I see that you added support for any freq....do you still recommend only using increments of 25 even though we can do anything now?

[chinatom]

For maximum performance, try the latest binaries from dropbox. 2-5Kh/s per miner can be gained overall.

HI,greater man,i use v1.0a , but don't have "read me"file to set my bat,  so i try 0.9c bat copy to v1.0a . like this "minerd-gc3355.exe --freq=888 --gc3355-autotune --gc3355=\\.\COM5,\\.\COM6 --url=stratum+tcp://stratum.f3pool.com:8888 --userpass=minerhouse.1:1 --no-refresh"
pause


this work very well, but have some "hw "   LIKE THIS:

 cpuminer-gc3355 (v1.0a) - Started: [2014-05-09 23:51:45]
================================================================================
 (2s) | 0.65/0.69 MH/s | A: 329 R: 1 HW: 11
 Connected to f3pool.com:8888 diff 174 with stratum as user minerhouse.1
================================================================================
 GSD 0: | 898 MHz | 302.7/329.5 KH/s | A: 151 R: 0 H: 5
 GSD 1: | 903 MHz | 352.2/381.0 KH/s | A: 180 R: 1 H: 6
1 hours ....   how can i Optimize my bat file .   this "hw" feel like the auto-freq make it, may i lock my freq .?   plz  help .  thx for your avdance..

[sandor111]

I see that you added support for any freq....do you still recommend only using increments of 25 even though we can do anything now?

Personally I get better results with 25 MHz increments, but for the G-Blade apparently the magical number is 838.

[ManeBjorn]

Cool I see a new version there only 45 mins old.
Thanks again.

For maximum performance, try the latest binaries from dropbox. 2-5Kh/s per miner can be gained overall.

[CartmanSPC]

Error on make:

Code:

make  all-recursive
make[1]: Entering directory `/home/sandor_kicks_ass/cpuminer-gc3355'
Making all in compat
make[2]: Entering directory `/home/sandor_kicks_ass/cpuminer-gc3355/compat'
make[3]: Entering directory `/home/sandor_kicks_ass/cpuminer-gc3355/compat'
make[3]: Nothing to be done for `all-am'.
make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/sandor_kicks_ass/cpuminer-gc3355/compat'
make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/sandor_kicks_ass/cpuminer-gc3355/compat'
make[2]: Entering directory `/home/sandor_kicks_ass/cpuminer-gc3355'
gcc -std=gnu99 -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I.  -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing     -O2 -MT minerd-cpu-miner.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/minerd-cpu-miner.Tpo -c -o minerd-cpu-miner.o `test -f 'cpu-miner.c' || echo './'`cpu-miner.c
cpu-miner.c: In function ‘api_parse_get’:
cpu-miner.c:1468:124: error: expected ‘)’ before ‘;’ token
cpu-miner.c:1470:4: error: expected ‘;’ before ‘}’ token
cpu-miner.c: In function ‘api_request_handler’:
cpu-miner.c:1621:7: warning: ignoring return value of ‘write’, declared with attribute warn_unused_result [-Wunused-result]
make[2]: *** [minerd-cpu-miner.o] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/sandor_kicks_ass/cpuminer-gc3355'
make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/sandor_kicks_ass/cpuminer-gc3355'
make: *** [all] Error 2

Think it's here...missing a closing ')':
https://github.com/siklon/cpuminer-gc3355/commit/020c54c4cc425a61bd017186520a06b91f128c13

[sandor111]

Error on make:

Code:

make  all-recursive
make[1]: Entering directory `/home/sandor_kicks_ass/cpuminer-gc3355'
Making all in compat
make[2]: Entering directory `/home/sandor_kicks_ass/cpuminer-gc3355/compat'
make[3]: Entering directory `/home/sandor_kicks_ass/cpuminer-gc3355/compat'
make[3]: Nothing to be done for `all-am'.
make[3]: Leaving directory `/home/sandor_kicks_ass/cpuminer-gc3355/compat'
make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/sandor_kicks_ass/cpuminer-gc3355/compat'
make[2]: Entering directory `/home/sandor_kicks_ass/cpuminer-gc3355'
gcc -std=gnu99 -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I.  -pthread -fno-strict-aliasing     -O2 -MT minerd-cpu-miner.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/minerd-cpu-miner.Tpo -c -o minerd-cpu-miner.o `test -f 'cpu-miner.c' || echo './'`cpu-miner.c
cpu-miner.c: In function ‘api_parse_get’:
cpu-miner.c:1468:124: error: expected ‘)’ before ‘;’ token
cpu-miner.c:1470:4: error: expected ‘;’ before ‘}’ token
cpu-miner.c: In function ‘api_request_handler’:
cpu-miner.c:1621:7: warning: ignoring return value of ‘write’, declared with attribute warn_unused_result [-Wunused-result]
make[2]: *** [minerd-cpu-miner.o] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/sandor_kicks_ass/cpuminer-gc3355'
make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/sandor_kicks_ass/cpuminer-gc3355'
make: *** [all] Error 2

Think it's here...missing a closing ')':
https://github.com/siklon/cpuminer-gc3355/commit/020c54c4cc425a61bd017186520a06b91f128c13

Thanks, fixed.

[edonkey]

I've been using auto-tune on a test rig for a few days and it's been rock solid. Thanks so much to Sandor for all the hard work. This is really shaping up to be the best mining software for GSDs out there.

As I understand it, I can harvest the auto-tune results of per chip frequency values from the API. I can use toxic0n's PHP script to do that.

But it looks like the frequency specification is on a per device node basis. I suspect that the dev nodes can change when rebooting, or if you add or remove GSDs.

It seems to me that in order to really make auto-tune useful, you need to be able to specify the frequencies on a per serial number basis, not per device node. And as cool as toxic0n's script is, I think that cpuminer should output the results of auto-tune so that it can be easily used for future launches.

So here's the features that I'd like to see to round out auto-tune:

• Add something in the main GUI indicating the status of auto tune. It would be nice to have an idea of how far it has to go without using the --debug option and scanning the log output.
• Add the option to specify the frequency by GSD serial number so that it will always work for known units, regardless of the order of device discovery.
• When quitting cpuminer and autotune is done, output the command line options that could be used in subsequent launches. Ideally this would be the serial number based frequency specification.

Sandor, thanks in advance for thinking about these features.

[sandor111]

I've been using auto-tune on a test rig for a few days and it's been rock solid. Thanks so much to Sandor for all the hard work. This is really shaping up to be the best mining software for GSDs out there.

As I understand it, I can harvest the auto-tune results of per chip frequency values from the API. I can use toxic0n's PHP script to do that.

But it looks like the frequency specification is on a per device node basis. I suspect that the dev nodes can change when rebooting, or if you add or remove GSDs.

It seems to me that in order to really make auto-tune useful, you need to be able to specify the frequencies on a per serial number basis, not per device node. And as cool as toxic0n's script is, I think that cpuminer should output the results of auto-tune so that it can be easily used for future launches.

So here's the features that I'd like to see to round out auto-tune:

• Add something in the main GUI indicating the status of auto tune. It would be nice to have an idea of how far it has to go without using the --debug option and scanning the log output.
• Add the option to specify the frequency by GSD serial number so that it will always work for known units, regardless of the order of device discovery.
• When quitting cpuminer and autotune is done, output the command line options that could be used in subsequent launches. Ideally this would be the serial number based frequency specification.

Sandor, thanks in advance for thinking about these features.

Thanks for the suggestions.
The JSON array has the dev node as key, but serial string is included as one of the values, so you can compare against that.

[fivejonnyfive]

I've been using auto-tune on a test rig for a few days and it's been rock solid. Thanks so much to Sandor for all the hard work. This is really shaping up to be the best mining software for GSDs out there.

As I understand it, I can harvest the auto-tune results of per chip frequency values from the API. I can use toxic0n's PHP script to do that.

But it looks like the frequency specification is on a per device node basis. I suspect that the dev nodes can change when rebooting, or if you add or remove GSDs.

It seems to me that in order to really make auto-tune useful, you need to be able to specify the frequencies on a per serial number basis, not per device node. And as cool as toxic0n's script is, I think that cpuminer should output the results of auto-tune so that it can be easily used for future launches.

So here's the features that I'd like to see to round out auto-tune:

• Add something in the main GUI indicating the status of auto tune. It would be nice to have an idea of how far it has to go without using the --debug option and scanning the log output.
• Add the option to specify the frequency by GSD serial number so that it will always work for known units, regardless of the order of device discovery.
• When quitting cpuminer and autotune is done, output the command line options that could be used in subsequent launches. Ideally this would be the serial number based frequency specification.

Sandor, thanks in advance for thinking about these features.

Thanks for the suggestions.
The JSON array has the dev node as key, but serial string is included as one of the values, so you can compare against that.

I think it would also be helpful if you could specify the autotune start frequency per-device. I don't know how feasible this would be but this would help minimize any inefficiency caused by the auto tune process, and I think it would also help to get more accurate tuning.

[toxic0n]

Sandor, ever since 0.9g, I'm getting the following message when connecting to MiningRigRentals. As you can see, the stratum server name also changes to some odd characters. Eventually, it says it cannot connect to stratum "http(null)". Not sure if it's an issue on my side or not

[nst6563]

So since any frequency is allowed now and not just 25Mhz steps, does autotune initially start with 25mhz steps and then fine tune it from that point down to something like 5mhz steps?

[sandor111]

So since any frequency is allowed now and not just 25Mhz steps, does autotune initially start with 25mhz steps and then fine tune it from that point down to something like 5mhz steps?

That would practically be impossible to manage, because for example 825 and 838 MHz are not equivalent, by that I mean that if 838 MHz is stable, there is no guarantee that 825 would also be stable. The commands are calculated from different PLL dividers and that can affect stability, by contrast if you use the same frequency stepping, it's almost 100% certain that a lower frequency will be stable if the current one is.

[sandor111]

Rejected shares have nothing to do with cpuminer-gc3355, proof:



As I said before, it's 50% you, 50% the pool you're on.
Anyone who can break my personal record? I think the first time Ghash.io isn't getting DDoS'd.

[nst6563]

So since any frequency is allowed now and not just 25Mhz steps, does autotune initially start with 25mhz steps and then fine tune it from that point down to something like 5mhz steps?

That would practically be impossible to manage, because for example 825 and 838 MHz are not equivalent, by that I mean that if 838 MHz is stable, there is no guarantee that 825 would also be stable. The commands are calculated from different PLL dividers and that can affect stability, by contrast if you use the same frequency stepping, it's almost 100% certain that a lower frequency will be stable if the current one is.

What?  You wouldn't like a challenge like that?  J/k

Makes sense.  But if they use different pll dividers would it be possible to create 2 autotune functions - each confined within its own pll divider?

That's kind of like the code I like to tinker with but unfortunately I don't know the language cpuminer is in and learning it takes more time than I have right now