Open Source XPM Pool + GPU Miner (aka. madPrimeMiner)

[wayla]

does this work on ypool?
can anyone share some basic settings (.bat file)

and can I use the opencl files from a 14.x driver running 13.12?

amd_opencl32.dll
amd_opencl64.dll
amdocl.dll
amdocl64.dll

no ypool version

[1713515343]

1713515343

[bruter]

I am constantly receiving this error and xpmserver crashes. How to solve this?

Code:

libprotobuf ERROR google/protobuf/message_lite.cc:123] Can't parse message of type "pool.proto.Reply" because it is missing required fields: error, work.height, work.time, work.bits

[LongAndShort]

I am constantly receiving this error and xpmserver crashes. How to solve this?

Code:

libprotobuf ERROR google/protobuf/message_lite.cc:123] Can't parse message of type "pool.proto.Reply" because it is missing required fields: error, work.height, work.time, work.bits

What other clients are you running at the same time as the xpmserver?
You prolly have another client and the ports are conflicting

[ivanlabrie]

Gonna give this a shot with Windows.

I'll post my feedback once I do.

[bruter]

What other clients are you running at the same time as the xpmserver?
You prolly have another client and the ports are conflicting

I am running xpmserver, xpmclient and peercoin-qt at the same time on the same PC.

[kev7112001]

Gonna give this a shot with Windows.

I'll post my feedback once I do.

been running it on win but i use separate wallets on each rig cause it keeps the latency down if u solo

[LongAndShort]

What other clients are you running at the same time as the xpmserver?
You prolly have another client and the ports are conflicting

I am running xpmserver, xpmclient and peercoin-qt at the same time on the same PC.

Its just that that message to me is saying its sending out a request query from the xpmclient but getting mixed results back that it dosn't understand. Meaning its asking on a port that something else might be using... possibly.. so i suggest maybe trying to force the ports on anything else you have running

Code:

rpcport="put numbers here "  port="put numbers here "

 to make sure they are not the same ports as the server uses but tbh it could just be that its querying the server but the server is busy or non responcive at the time i don't see it as a huge issue as long as its not effecting the block update and you can check this by running or finding a source where you can see the new block come in and if the miner output shows the new block work update in time i think you are fine.

Let us know cause i could be totally wrong so anyone chime in if you think its something else


@kev why haven't you left mcx mate its a sinking ship and a stain on your rep..just sayin

[fran2k]

i have 68CPD power

the profit calculator says i suppose to mine 55xpm a day with current diff, and through the last day i mined about 40xpm.

How-to calculate profit from CPD with MadMax's miner.

XpmPerDay = (CPD*(11 - Diffuculty) + CPD/32,27) * (1000 / Diffuculty^2)
Where 32,27 - coefficient 10ch number/11ch number

For example 68CPD with difficulty 10,95:
XpmPerDay = (68*0,05 + 68/32,27) * (1000 / 119,9025) = (3,4 + 2,1) * 8,34 = 45,87XPM
Pool fee: 2,2935XPM
Total: 43,5765, it's like about 40xpm

It seems, calculator uses different coefficient, not 32,27.

Radeon R9 290X with diffuculty 10,95 mines 0,558 block/day (using 10ch version).. 11ch shows 0,47cpd + some 10ch shares (I can say how much shares, no statistics). If shares more than 2, 11ch version more profitable since diffuculty reach 10,95

Wow man, thanks for this.

[MarcusDe]

I've set new XPM pool, http://xpm.graymines.net/
1% fee, you can try it ;-)
Pool target is 11.

[seansplayin]

Service release: https://www.dropbox.com/s/52hlsg3kir7by3t/xpmclient_v8.2.tar.gz (Temperature monitoring and overclocking must work on Windows)
and +1-2% speedup (up to 13,9CPD on reference R9 290X).

I'm running the solo pool and the client both, how to target 11 chain blocks? changed pool config to 11 chain but  above clients still show target=10 and doesn't have the option do use the 11 chain kernal like the earlier client.
please help

[wayla]

Service release: https://www.dropbox.com/s/52hlsg3kir7by3t/xpmclient_v8.2.tar.gz (Temperature monitoring and overclocking must work on Windows)
and +1-2% speedup (up to 13,9CPD on reference R9 290X).

I'm running the solo pool and the client both, how to target 11 chain blocks? changed pool config to 11 chain but  above clients still show target=10 and doesn't have the option do use the 11 chain kernal like the earlier client.
please help

u need rebuild the kernel.bin file for target 11.

[eXtremal]

Next miner update: https://www.dropbox.com/s/fwemao6bdatxe3a/xpmclient_v9.tar.gz?dl=0

+4-5% performance (up to 14.3-14.4CPD on stock R9 290X, 12.4-12.5 on R9 290)
benchmark mode added (it's a prepare for support non-GCN GPUs, such as Radeon HD 6xxx and NVidia Maxwell - 750Ti, GTX970, GTX980). For run benchmark, launch xpmclient with -b parameter. Output example for downclocked (700/1250) Radeon R9 290X:

./xpmclient -b

Hawaii; 44 compute units
square 320 bits: 31.474ms (4264.400M ops/sec)
square 320 bits: 27.041ms (4963.490M ops/sec)
multiply 320 bits: 36.439ms (3683.354M ops/sec)
square 352 bits: 32.541ms (4124.573M ops/sec)
multiply 352 bits: 42.413ms (3164.542M ops/sec)
Fermat tests 320 bits: 46.717ms (2.806M ops/sec)
Fermat tests 352 bits: 61.277ms (2.139M ops/sec)

 *** hashmod benchmark ***
 MHash per second: 454.451
 Hash per iteration: 40.344 (0.000385 %)
 Hashes by multipliers count:
   * [8] 38.641 (95.778%)
   * [9] 1.578 (3.912%)
   * [10] 0.125 (0.310%)

For pool mining, rename xpm.config.txt or dtc.config.txt (for DataCoin mining) to config.txt and change "address" field to your wallet. Sieve primorial at this version must be 14:

sieveprimorial = ["14", "14", "14", "14, "14"];

v9 tested only on Linux at this moment.

[ap1]

Next miner update: https://www.dropbox.com/s/fwemao6bdatxe3a/xpmclient_v9.tar.gz?dl=0

+4-5% performance (up to 14.3-14.4CPD on stock R9 290X, 12.4-12.5 on R9 290)
benchmark mode added (it's a prepare for support non-GCN GPUs, such as Radeon HD 6xxx and NVidia Maxwell - 750Ti, GTX970, GTX980). For run benchmark, launch xpmclient with -b parameter. Output example for downclocked (700/1250) Radeon R9 290X:

./xpmclient -b

Hawaii; 44 compute units
square 320 bits: 31.474ms (4264.400M ops/sec)
square 320 bits: 27.041ms (4963.490M ops/sec)
multiply 320 bits: 36.439ms (3683.354M ops/sec)
square 352 bits: 32.541ms (4124.573M ops/sec)
multiply 352 bits: 42.413ms (3164.542M ops/sec)
Fermat tests 320 bits: 46.717ms (2.806M ops/sec)
Fermat tests 352 bits: 61.277ms (2.139M ops/sec)

 *** hashmod benchmark ***
 MHash per second: 454.451
 Hash per iteration: 40.344 (0.000385 %)
 Hashes by multipliers count:
   * [8] 38.641 (95.778%)
   * [9] 1.578 (3.912%)
   * [10] 0.125 (0.310%)

For pool mining, rename xpm.config.txt or dtc.config.txt (for DataCoin mining) to config.txt and change "address" field to your wallet. Sieve primorial at this version must be 14:

sieveprimorial = ["14", "14", "14", "14, "14"];

v9 tested only on Linux at this moment.

Wow, I thought the development was halt. It is good that you plan to support Nvidia Maxwell.

FYI, your new update is probably optimized for 290/290X. I tried it on 270 and 280X and both shows a bit slower performance than before. I guess probably as your new update requires using sieve primorial 14 while (at least what I found) 270 and 280X works better on sieve primorial 13.

[eXtremal]

I guess probably as your new update requires using sieve primorial 14 while (at least what I found) 270 and 280X works better on sieve primorial 13.

Can you show miner output on 270 and 280X from versions 8.2 and 9 ?

[kev7112001]

I guess probably as your new update requires using sieve primorial 14 while (at least what I found) 270 and 280X works better on sieve primorial 13.

Can you show miner output on 270 and 280X from versions 8.2 and 9 ?

i get 9.4-9.7 on 7970 1120/1250  on windows also can we use the 11ch kernel.bin from old or do we need to recompile

[eXtremal]

i get 9.4-9.7 on 7970 1120/1250  on windows

9.7cpd with version 8.2 or 9.0?

can we use the 11ch kernel.bin from old or do we need to recompile

No, old 11ch kernel not compatible with current miner version.
With current difficulty (10.97xxx) 10ch version more profitable.

[kev7112001]

i get 9.4-9.7 on 7970 1120/1250  on windows

9.7cpd with version 8.2 or 9.0?

can we use the 11ch kernel.bin from old or do we need to recompile

No, old 11ch kernel not compatible with current miner version.
With current difficulty (10.97xxx) 10ch version more profitable.

9.0 not much diff with 7970 but 290x gets a nice bump

[wayla]

I guess probably as your new update requires using sieve primorial 14 while (at least what I found) 270 and 280X works better on sieve primorial 13.

Can you show miner output on 270 and 280X from versions 8.2 and 9 ?

same rig  2X 280x+1X 270X
GPU 0: core=1000MHz mem=1500MHz powertune=20 fanspeed=75
GPU 1: core=1050MHz mem=1400MHz powertune=20 fanspeed=75
GPU 2: core=1000MHz mem=1500MHz powertune=20 fanspeed=75


from 9 after 20minutes
Work received: height=732508 diff=10.971653 latency=0ms
[GPU 0] T=64C A=98% E=0 primes=0.104160 fermat=648211/sec cpd=8.42/day
[GPU 1] T=49C A=99% E=0 primes=0.104018 fermat=405136/sec cpd=5.19/day
[GPU 2] T=67C A=98% E=0 primes=0.104247 fermat=645997/sec cpd=8.46/day

from8.2 after 20minutes

[GPU 0] T=66C A=99% E=0 primes=0.105279 fermat=599485/sec cpd=8.66/day
[GPU 1] T=52C A=99% E=0 primes=0.105450 fermat=374127/sec cpd=5.50/day
[GPU 2] T=70C A=99% E=0 primes=0.105255 fermat=601797/sec cpd=8.68/day

[kev7112001]

I guess probably as your new update requires using sieve primorial 14 while (at least what I found) 270 and 280X works better on sieve primorial 13.

Can you show miner output on 270 and 280X from versions 8.2 and 9 ?

same rig  2X 280x+1X 270X
GPU 0: core=1000MHz mem=1500MHz powertune=20 fanspeed=75
GPU 1: core=1050MHz mem=1400MHz powertune=20 fanspeed=75
GPU 2: core=1000MHz mem=1500MHz powertune=20 fanspeed=75


from 9 after 20minutes
Work received: height=732508 diff=10.971653 latency=0ms
[GPU 0] T=64C A=98% E=0 primes=0.104160 fermat=648211/sec cpd=8.42/day
[GPU 1] T=49C A=99% E=0 primes=0.104018 fermat=405136/sec cpd=5.19/day
[GPU 2] T=67C A=98% E=0 primes=0.104247 fermat=645997/sec cpd=8.46/day

from8.2 after 20minutes

[GPU 0] T=66C A=99% E=0 primes=0.105279 fermat=599485/sec cpd=8.66/day
[GPU 1] T=52C A=99% E=0 primes=0.105450 fermat=374127/sec cpd=5.50/day
[GPU 2] T=70C A=99% E=0 primes=0.105255 fermat=601797/sec cpd=8.68/day

for your 280x you will get about 1cpd more if u turn your clocks up 1100 and mem to 1250

[ap1]

I guess probably as your new update requires using sieve primorial 14 while (at least what I found) 270 and 280X works better on sieve primorial 13.

Can you show miner output on 270 and 280X from versions 8.2 and 9 ?

GPU 0 : 270, GPU 1-2 : 7950, GPU 3-5 : 280X

v8.2 , sieve primorial 13

[GPU 0] T=79C A=99% E=0 primes=0.105580 fermat=366328/sec cpd=5.45/day
[GPU 1] T=69C A=99% E=0 primes=0.105392 fermat=553540/sec cpd=8.09/day
[GPU 2] T=72C A=99% E=0 primes=0.105485 fermat=553552/sec cpd=8.16/day
[GPU 3] T=78C A=99% E=0 primes=0.105531 fermat=665207/sec cpd=9.85/day
[GPU 4] T=82C A=99% E=0 primes=0.105622 fermat=626369/sec cpd=9.35/day
[GPU 5] T=86C A=99% E=0 primes=0.105346 fermat=653325/sec cpd=9.50/day
GPU 0: core=1000MHz mem=1500MHz powertune=20 fanspeed=29
GPU 1: core=1025MHz mem=1500MHz powertune=20 fanspeed=58
GPU 2: core=1025MHz mem=1500MHz powertune=20 fanspeed=58
GPU 3: core=1120MHz mem=1750MHz powertune=20 fanspeed=78
GPU 4: core=1050MHz mem=1600MHz powertune=20 fanspeed=84
GPU 5: core=1100MHz mem=1700MHz powertune=20 fanspeed=91

v9, sieve primorial 14

[GPU 0] T=77C A=99% E=0 primes=0.103699 fermat=402666/sec cpd=5.00/day
[GPU 1] T=69C A=99% E=0 primes=0.104086 fermat=620377/sec cpd=8.00/day
[GPU 2] T=71C A=99% E=0 primes=0.104176 fermat=622481/sec cpd=8.10/day
[GPU 3] T=77C A=98% E=0 primes=0.104209 fermat=744317/sec cpd=9.71/day
[GPU 4] T=83C A=98% E=0 primes=0.104315 fermat=700036/sec cpd=9.23/day
[GPU 5] T=86C A=98% E=0 primes=0.104253 fermat=732571/sec cpd=9.60/day

I have another test rig having 2x 270 which is also showing like 5% slow down.
Basically 270 is affected most. For 7950 and 280x the difference are minimal but v9 is definitely a tiny bit slower (I don't know why the last card looks faster when I took sample this round but a test result is a test result as is. )