ichi
Member
 Offline
Activity: 182
Merit: 10
|
 |
July 22, 2010, 06:30:17 PM |
|
Wow, that tweaked one... I'm getting stunning rates. I have a quad core Intel laptop. I have ... one while everything but bitcoin (including explorer.exe) is shut down. | Stock: | x64 v1 | x64 v2 | x64 v2 Tweaked | | <snip> | | Optimized Usage: | 1500-1800 | 2000-2500 | 1500-2000 | 2700-3400 |
On a Quad-Core AMD Opteron 2376 server running Ubuntu 10.04 Desktop x64 (wubi) and Bitcoin 0.3.0 x64, I get ~2,200 khash/s. With Bitcoin 0.3.0 x86, I get ~2,000 khash/s. What would I expect running Windows Server 2008 x64 and Olipro's x64 v2 Tweaked? Is it faster than the stock Linux x64 build? Could the Linux build be similarly tweaked? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Transactions must be included in a block to be properly completed. When you send a transaction, it is broadcast to miners. Miners can then optionally include it in their next blocks. Miners will be more inclined to include your transaction if it has a higher transaction fee.
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quantumplation
|
|
July 22, 2010, 06:33:46 PM |
|
Ichi: Probably pretty fast, I saw a huge increase in performance to the tweaked version. No tellin until you try it though.
|
NOTE: This account was compromised from 2017 to 2021. I'm in the process of deleting posts not made by me.
|
|
|
|
BitLex
|
|
July 22, 2010, 08:00:49 PM
Last edit: July 22, 2010, 09:25:31 PM by BitLex |
|
I'll give this one a run, the last build would crash randomly after a few hours  same here, MSVC build didnt work at all (missing DLL even after vcredist_x64 install), Intel build seems to work fine for 1-2hours and then crashes. I get around 1600 with the regular client, Intel build ~2150, latest Intel tweaked ~2220. Update: this one seems to crash even faster, 30minutes first run, almost 1hour second run |
|
|
|
Olipro (OP)
Member
Offline
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
|
|
July 22, 2010, 10:27:53 PM |
|
I'll give this one a run, the last build would crash randomly after a few hours same here, MSVC build didnt work at all (missing DLL even after vcredist_x64 install), Intel build seems to work fine for 1-2hours and then crashes. I get around 1600 with the regular client, Intel build ~2150, latest Intel tweaked ~2220. Update: this one seems to crash even faster, 30minutes first run, almost 1hour second run the missing DLL is in my first release (libeay32.dll) |
|
|
|
|
kosovito
Member
Offline
Activity: 77
Merit: 10
|
|
July 22, 2010, 10:31:12 PM |
|
Vista x64 here
From regular version ~1700khash/s to this version ~2300khash/s (last versios posted here)
Really nice, but i think need to be more stable
|
Please sir, give me any coin  135T7F27z7Mtvwffz359BE1zSfYgT1oJ8S |
|
|
Olipro (OP)
Member
Offline
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
|
|
July 22, 2010, 10:33:54 PM |
|
Vista x64 here
From regular version ~1700khash/s to this version ~2300khash/s (last versios posted here)
Really nice, but i think need to be more stable
given that it's based on stock code and I doubt there's an issue with the compiler, it's more likely there's a bug in the SVN source, I'll make a build from the last stable production version just as soon as I've finished this CUDA code off. |
|
|
|
|
|
BitLex
|
|
July 23, 2010, 12:02:49 AM |
|
I'll give this one a run, the last build would crash randomly after a few hours same here, MSVC build didnt work at all (missing DLL even after vcredist_x64 install), Intel build seems to work fine for 1-2hours and then crashes. I get around 1600 with the regular client, Intel build ~2150, latest Intel tweaked ~2220. Update: this one seems to crash even faster, 30minutes first run, almost 1hour second run the missing DLL is in my first release (libeay32.dll) thats not the one causing MSVC build not to work, that'd be MSVCR100.dll. anyway, the Intel build does work, although it crashes.  keep coding, i'm looking forward to test a cuda-version on my gtx260.  |
|
|
|
|
knightmb
|
|
July 23, 2010, 12:41:38 AM |
|
My experience is similar, the first release was rock solid like the original client, the other releases, while still faster, randomly crash after minutes/hours/days so it's kind of random. So it's a trade off between stability and speed. The faster it gets, the less stable it seems. Of course, I have mine on a batch to restart if there is a crash and to count how many times the program crashed during the day for example. So far up to about 2 crashes a day. |
Timekoin - The World's Most Energy Efficient Encrypted Digital Currency
|
|
|
Bitcoiner
Member
Offline
Activity: 70
Merit: 11
|
|
July 24, 2010, 12:01:28 AM |
|
There is a speedup for me, but it is not faster than the ubuntu 64-bit version. I am surprised; with SSE2 I expected it to fly :S
|
Want to thank me for this post? Donate here! Flip your coins over to: 13Cq8AmdrqewatRxEyU2xNuMvegbaLCvEe
|
|
|
|
knightmb
|
|
July 24, 2010, 12:19:34 AM |
|
There is a speedup for me, but it is not faster than the ubuntu 64-bit version. I am surprised; with SSE2 I expected it to fly :S
Yeah, my Linux 64bit systems still have the leg up on my windows servers, even with this optimization that is made that speeds them up by 50%, seems Linux still rules the roost for coin generation speed. Most of my coin generation comes from my Linux servers more than my windows servers, it's about a 1 to 4 ratio, for every 4 blocks made by my Linux servers, 1 will be made by one of the windows servers. |
Timekoin - The World's Most Energy Efficient Encrypted Digital Currency
|
|
|
Olipro (OP)
Member
Offline
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
|
|
July 24, 2010, 01:56:34 AM |
|
There is a speedup for me, but it is not faster than the ubuntu 64-bit version. I am surprised; with SSE2 I expected it to fly :S
Yeah, my Linux 64bit systems still have the leg up on my windows servers, even with this optimization that is made that speeds them up by 50%, seems Linux still rules the roost for coin generation speed. Most of my coin generation comes from my Linux servers more than my windows servers, it's about a 1 to 4 ratio, for every 4 blocks made by my Linux servers, 1 will be made by one of the windows servers. that's not an indicator of performance mind, block generation is pure luck, it's the hashes per second that mean something. |
|
|
|
|
|
knightmb
|
|
July 24, 2010, 03:38:55 AM |
|
There is a speedup for me, but it is not faster than the ubuntu 64-bit version. I am surprised; with SSE2 I expected it to fly :S
Yeah, my Linux 64bit systems still have the leg up on my windows servers, even with this optimization that is made that speeds them up by 50%, seems Linux still rules the roost for coin generation speed. Most of my coin generation comes from my Linux servers more than my windows servers, it's about a 1 to 4 ratio, for every 4 blocks made by my Linux servers, 1 will be made by one of the windows servers. that's not an indicator of performance mind, block generation is pure luck, it's the hashes per second that mean something. Yes, sorry, I left that part out, the Linux servers (same hardware) always generate higher khash/s than the windows machines, at least mine do. Your mileage may vary. |
Timekoin - The World's Most Energy Efficient Encrypted Digital Currency
|
|
|
Bitcoiner
Member
Offline
Activity: 70
Merit: 11
|
|
July 24, 2010, 03:36:45 PM |
|
There is a speedup for me, but it is not faster than the ubuntu 64-bit version. I am surprised; with SSE2 I expected it to fly :S
Yeah, my Linux 64bit systems still have the leg up on my windows servers, even with this optimization that is made that speeds them up by 50%, seems Linux still rules the roost for coin generation speed. Most of my coin generation comes from my Linux servers more than my windows servers, it's about a 1 to 4 ratio, for every 4 blocks made by my Linux servers, 1 will be made by one of the windows servers. that's not an indicator of performance mind, block generation is pure luck, it's the hashes per second that mean something. Yes, sorry, I left that part out, the Linux servers (same hardware) always generate higher khash/s than the windows machines, at least mine do. Your mileage may vary. On my desktop, I have a dual boot between Ubuntu and Windows 7. The SSE2 build brings Windows 7 speeds up to around the same as the Ubuntu build. |
Want to thank me for this post? Donate here! Flip your coins over to: 13Cq8AmdrqewatRxEyU2xNuMvegbaLCvEe
|
|
|
ichi
Member
Offline
Activity: 182
Merit: 10
|
|
July 24, 2010, 11:14:13 PM |
|
On my desktop, I have a dual boot between Ubuntu and Windows 7. The SSE2 build brings Windows 7 speeds up to around the same as the Ubuntu build. OK. Could someone please explain the why of that, in terms that a non-programmer can understand? Why is the stock Windows build slower than the stock Ubuntu build? |
|
|
|
|
|
knightmb
|
|
July 25, 2010, 12:54:44 AM |
|
On my desktop, I have a dual boot between Ubuntu and Windows 7. The SSE2 build brings Windows 7 speeds up to around the same as the Ubuntu build. OK. Could someone please explain the why of that, in terms that a non-programmer can understand? Why is the stock Windows build slower than the stock Ubuntu build? Optimizations mainly. When the program is being compiled on Windows, certainly optimizations make the program more efficient. On Linux, we have both 32bit and 64bit builds to take advantage of the 64bit arch of the system. On windows, there was only a 32bit build. |
Timekoin - The World's Most Energy Efficient Encrypted Digital Currency
|
|
|
ichi
Member
Offline
Activity: 182
Merit: 10
|
|
July 25, 2010, 01:30:15 AM |
|
Thank you. I'm glad that I'm moving to Ubuntu.
|
|
|
|
|
Bitcoiner
Member
Offline
Activity: 70
Merit: 11
|
|
July 25, 2010, 06:13:57 AM |
|
Thank you. I'm glad that I'm moving to Ubuntu.
I still prefer windows 7 for many things, but I am liking Ubuntu more and more. If only some things weren't such a pain in the ass to use (Tor: Windows 7? 1 minute install. Ubuntu? WTF...) |
Want to thank me for this post? Donate here! Flip your coins over to: 13Cq8AmdrqewatRxEyU2xNuMvegbaLCvEe
|
|
|
ichi
Member
Offline
Activity: 182
Merit: 10
|
|
July 25, 2010, 08:05:05 AM |
|
I really like Windows Server 2008, which is pretty close to Windows 7. It'll be a while before I give that up.
OTOH, I'm thinking very seriously re going with Ubuntu for my next primary desktop. As a test, I've recently installed Ubuntu 10.04 Server x64 + GNOME on an old Core 2 Quad machine. Everything except boot lives on an encrypted RAID5 array managed by LVM. Losing Excel 2007 might be a problem, though.
Although I don't use Tor, I'm sure that there must be many setup guides for Ubuntu.
This is way off topic. Sorry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quantumplation
|
|
July 25, 2010, 02:59:03 PM |
|
I absolutely hate Ubuntu, mostly because of the community surrounding it. I much prefer gentoo, Debian, etc.
|
NOTE: This account was compromised from 2017 to 2021. I'm in the process of deleting posts not made by me.
|
|
|
andy_3_913
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
|
|
July 25, 2010, 07:15:26 PM |
|
mind if i ask? satoshi has released a couple of updates recently, mostly about security concerns as far as i can see. how are the 64bit versions keeping up with these developments? |
|
|
|
|
|
