Bitcoin Forum
December 14, 2017, 11:08:43 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.15.1  [Torrent].
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Pages: « 1 ... 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 [94] 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 ... 221 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN]CureCoin - CURECOIN TEAM HAS TAKEN RANK 1 ON FOLDING@HOME!!!  (Read 668195 times)
ChasingTheDream
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
May 28, 2014, 01:02:53 AM
 #1861

i waited for the log to show all 6 stats.Check now please:

This looks accurate to me. Here's what you see:

GPU3 - 64%->65%
GPU2 - 65%->66%
GPU1 - 64%->65%
CPU - 40%

There's nothing out of the ordinary there. It's just that your GPUs are about equal on their work orders.

I agree this looks fine.  Just make sure you have enough CPU cores for what you are doing or else you will not get the PPD you expect because your GPU's will be bottlenecked.  The CPU needs to be able to feed the GPU's.

Also when looking at the log, use the filter and look at each slot individually.  Compare the percentages one by one.  It is a lot easier that way for me at least.

alright thanks for your help!.I only surf with the pc other than folding and using igpu for watching videos and here is my cpu usage when folding.Do you think the cpu bottleneck the gpus?


It looks like you are running three GPU's.  Based on what I have read in this thread and others, that means you need four CPU cores just to handle the GPU's.  So if you have a quad core processor, you should not use your CPU to fold with.  I followed their advice.  One CPU core per GPU and then one spare CPU core.

However you are 40% through your CPU work.  Let it finish.  Specifically you can right click the CPU slot on the status tab and select "Finish".  Then the CPU will not take on more work when it is done.

You can remove your CPU via the Configure (upper left of client) -->  Slots (tab).

hmm ok then, i have an i-4770k  its a quadcore so i should not use my cpu.Then  should i get a 2011 socket one for folding with it?

Cpu is fine, leave it be, it has 8 threads and the program will assign them accordingly.
You don't need to do anything in this case.

I've been wondering about this.  I've seen one thread per GPU and I've seen one core per GPU.  Which is it?  If it is threads then I'm under utilized my CPU's and my CPU's are not under load so I suspect it really is threads.

On a related note, do we need a spare thread or do we need a spare core after the GPU's are accounted for?  The reason I ask about this is because the client does not seem to set aside a spare thread or core if you use the default settings and let the client decide.
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1513249723
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513249723

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513249723
Reply with quote  #2

1513249723
Report to moderator
1513249723
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513249723

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513249723
Reply with quote  #2

1513249723
Report to moderator
1513249723
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1513249723

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1513249723
Reply with quote  #2

1513249723
Report to moderator
bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2184


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
May 28, 2014, 01:07:21 AM
 #1862

The problem is that if you load your cpu, the fah processes will fight each other as they're all low and you want the gpu compiling to finish quickly otherwise the gpus are idle and that's where the points are at

Reputation  |  PGP  |  DigitalOcean  |  TorGuard  |  Ethereum Classic
Bitcoin: 3DSh6AnmvBpDJFUz2mnLirMLmTMcFs9nDm
Bitmessage: BM-2cXN9j8NFT2n1FxDVQ6HQq4D4MZuuaBFyb
ChasingTheDream
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
May 28, 2014, 01:16:56 AM
 #1863

The problem is that if you load your cpu, the fah processes will fight each other as they're all low and you want the gpu compiling to finish quickly otherwise the gpus are idle and that's where the points are at

At what CPU % utilization are you talking about though?  My CPU's are running at 13% or less so I suspect threads are the key and not the cores.  I've seen quotes of CPU utilization of 90% or more.  I've never been close to that.
bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2184


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
May 28, 2014, 01:19:13 AM
 #1864

The problem is that if you load your cpu, the fah processes will fight each other as they're all low and you want the gpu compiling to finish quickly otherwise the gpus are idle and that's where the points are at

At what CPU % utilization are you talking about though?  My CPU's are running at 13% or less so I suspect threads are the key and not the cores.  I've seen quotes of CPU utilization of 90% or more.  I've never been close to that.

Just use 4/8

Compiling is intermittent

Reputation  |  PGP  |  DigitalOcean  |  TorGuard  |  Ethereum Classic
Bitcoin: 3DSh6AnmvBpDJFUz2mnLirMLmTMcFs9nDm
Bitmessage: BM-2cXN9j8NFT2n1FxDVQ6HQq4D4MZuuaBFyb
ChasingTheDream
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
May 28, 2014, 01:26:06 AM
 #1865

The problem is that if you load your cpu, the fah processes will fight each other as they're all low and you want the gpu compiling to finish quickly otherwise the gpus are idle and that's where the points are at

At what CPU % utilization are you talking about though?  My CPU's are running at 13% or less so I suspect threads are the key and not the cores.  I've seen quotes of CPU utilization of 90% or more.  I've never been close to that.

Just use 4/8

Compiling is intermittent

ok thanks.
bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2184


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
May 28, 2014, 01:36:37 AM
 #1866

Finally a coin I can start using Nvidia with

Reputation  |  PGP  |  DigitalOcean  |  TorGuard  |  Ethereum Classic
Bitcoin: 3DSh6AnmvBpDJFUz2mnLirMLmTMcFs9nDm
Bitmessage: BM-2cXN9j8NFT2n1FxDVQ6HQq4D4MZuuaBFyb
ChasingTheDream
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
May 28, 2014, 01:41:17 AM
 #1867

Finally a coin I can start using Nvidia with

It's funny because I've got 15 290X TRIX that has taken some time to get working and I've still got one machine that may not be right yet.  At the same time I had a GTX 590 from a couple years ago and I put that in a 9 year old machine.  That machine has not had one issue.  Not a single hung WU, no freezes, nothing.  It isn't turning out a load of PPD but it is quite stable.

The computers with my 290X TRIX cards are a different matter.
ranlo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610



View Profile
May 28, 2014, 02:19:43 AM
 #1868

Finally a coin I can start using Nvidia with

It's funny because I've got 15 290X TRIX that has taken some time to get working and I've still got one machine that may not be right yet.  At the same time I had a GTX 590 from a couple years ago and I put that in a 9 year old machine.  That machine has not had one issue.  Not a single hung WU, no freezes, nothing.  It isn't turning out a load of PPD but it is quite stable.

The computers with my 290X TRIX cards are a different matter.

It's interesting that you're having so many issues. Maybe my lack of problems is due to just having one card. After I got an understanding of how the program works (thanks to you), it's been clear sailing with my 7950. I do have graphics card faults when I try to game and such, but that's to be expected. Past that, no problems at all.


 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 




















Earn Devcoins by Writing
bitpop
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 2184


https://keybase.io/bitpop


View Profile WWW
May 28, 2014, 02:22:12 AM
 #1869

Amd drivers are shit. Nvidia has beautiful unified drivers

Reputation  |  PGP  |  DigitalOcean  |  TorGuard  |  Ethereum Classic
Bitcoin: 3DSh6AnmvBpDJFUz2mnLirMLmTMcFs9nDm
Bitmessage: BM-2cXN9j8NFT2n1FxDVQ6HQq4D4MZuuaBFyb
cameronpalte
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294


View Profile
May 28, 2014, 02:34:40 AM
 #1870

Amd drivers are shit. Nvidia has beautiful unified drivers

Lol true.

Bitcoin Facuet List - Free http://bitcoinsfaucetslist.blogspot.com/
ivanlabrie
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 812



View Profile
May 28, 2014, 03:48:50 AM
 #1871

No where near as cpu bound as AMD too...  Roll Eyes
I want 4 GTX 880 reference cards (Titan style cooler please)
cameronpalte
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 294


View Profile
May 28, 2014, 03:49:34 AM
 #1872

No where near as cpu bound as AMD too...  Roll Eyes
I want 4 GTX 880 reference cards (Titan style cooler please)

That would be great Smiley does anyone know when they come out?

Bitcoin Facuet List - Free http://bitcoinsfaucetslist.blogspot.com/
ChasingTheDream
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
May 28, 2014, 04:16:17 AM
 #1873

Finally a coin I can start using Nvidia with

It's funny because I've got 15 290X TRIX that has taken some time to get working and I've still got one machine that may not be right yet.  At the same time I had a GTX 590 from a couple years ago and I put that in a 9 year old machine.  That machine has not had one issue.  Not a single hung WU, no freezes, nothing.  It isn't turning out a load of PPD but it is quite stable.

The computers with my 290X TRIX cards are a different matter.

It's interesting that you're having so many issues. Maybe my lack of problems is due to just having one card. After I got an understanding of how the program works (thanks to you), it's been clear sailing with my 7950. I do have graphics card faults when I try to game and such, but that's to be expected. Past that, no problems at all.

The truth is that most of the issues are simply because I'm learning something new.  With Scrypt mining making small speed changes would get you to the sweet spot pretty quick because you may only end up moving 30-40 MH/s.  It never occurred to me that I would be moving clock speeds more than 100 MH/s with folding.  So had I been moving 50 MH/s at a time instead of 10 MH/s then I would have got stable a lot faster.

Additionally, just like Scrypt not all cards will run at the same speeds and you don't know which cards they are until you have issues.  So yeah, having more cards does make a difference and hunting down the problems is an iterative process.

And finally, as bitpop pointed out above AMD drivers seem to suck and I am on 14.4!  I had always preferred Nvidia cards before I got interested in mining.  I am disappointed with AMD GPU's.  I'm not going to lie about it.  When I replace my existing hardware if Nvidia is even close in terms of PPD I will never look at AMD again.  Just not impressed.
ranlo
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1610



View Profile
May 28, 2014, 04:24:11 AM
 #1874

Finally a coin I can start using Nvidia with

It's funny because I've got 15 290X TRIX that has taken some time to get working and I've still got one machine that may not be right yet.  At the same time I had a GTX 590 from a couple years ago and I put that in a 9 year old machine.  That machine has not had one issue.  Not a single hung WU, no freezes, nothing.  It isn't turning out a load of PPD but it is quite stable.

The computers with my 290X TRIX cards are a different matter.

It's interesting that you're having so many issues. Maybe my lack of problems is due to just having one card. After I got an understanding of how the program works (thanks to you), it's been clear sailing with my 7950. I do have graphics card faults when I try to game and such, but that's to be expected. Past that, no problems at all.

The truth is that most of the issues are simply because I'm learning something new.  With Scrypt mining making small speed changes would get you to the sweet spot pretty quick because you may only end up moving 30-40 MH/s.  It never occurred to me that I would be moving clock speeds more than 100 MH/s with folding.  So had I been moving 50 MH/s at a time instead of 10 MH/s then I would have got stable a lot faster.

Additionally, just like Scrypt not all cards will run at the same speeds and you don't know which cards they are until you have issues.  So yeah, having more cards does make a difference and hunting down the problems is an iterative process.

And finally, as bitpop pointed out above AMD drivers seem to suck and I am on 14.4!  I had always preferred Nvidia cards before I got interested in mining.  I am disappointed with AMD GPU's.  I'm not going to lie about it.  When I replace my existing hardware if Nvidia is even close in terms of PPD I will never look at AMD again.  Just not impressed.

Ohhh, so you're trying to max out the folding rate as well?

I was going to try this, but it's extremely difficult to tell the actual rate (especially in real-time) due to how the folding system works. I figured I'd just leave my card at stock and let it go however it wants.


 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 




















Earn Devcoins by Writing
ChasingTheDream
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
May 28, 2014, 04:30:06 AM
 #1875

Finally a coin I can start using Nvidia with

It's funny because I've got 15 290X TRIX that has taken some time to get working and I've still got one machine that may not be right yet.  At the same time I had a GTX 590 from a couple years ago and I put that in a 9 year old machine.  That machine has not had one issue.  Not a single hung WU, no freezes, nothing.  It isn't turning out a load of PPD but it is quite stable.

The computers with my 290X TRIX cards are a different matter.

It's interesting that you're having so many issues. Maybe my lack of problems is due to just having one card. After I got an understanding of how the program works (thanks to you), it's been clear sailing with my 7950. I do have graphics card faults when I try to game and such, but that's to be expected. Past that, no problems at all.

The truth is that most of the issues are simply because I'm learning something new.  With Scrypt mining making small speed changes would get you to the sweet spot pretty quick because you may only end up moving 30-40 MH/s.  It never occurred to me that I would be moving clock speeds more than 100 MH/s with folding.  So had I been moving 50 MH/s at a time instead of 10 MH/s then I would have got stable a lot faster.

Additionally, just like Scrypt not all cards will run at the same speeds and you don't know which cards they are until you have issues.  So yeah, having more cards does make a difference and hunting down the problems is an iterative process.

And finally, as bitpop pointed out above AMD drivers seem to suck and I am on 14.4!  I had always preferred Nvidia cards before I got interested in mining.  I am disappointed with AMD GPU's.  I'm not going to lie about it.  When I replace my existing hardware if Nvidia is even close in terms of PPD I will never look at AMD again.  Just not impressed.

Ohhh, so you're trying to max out the folding rate as well?

I was going to try this, but it's extremely difficult to tell the actual rate (especially in real-time) due to how the folding system works. I figured I'd just leave my card at stock and let it go however it wants.

Well not really.  In the case of folding I've done nothing but continue to downclock my cards trying to find a speed they will run at consistently.  For most of the cards that is done but I still have a couple that are putting up a fight.  This morning when I checked my machines I had a couple instances where I had hung work units.  So I lowered the core rate 10 MH/s and rebooted.  So far they have run all day with no issues.  So I'm probably getting close to the right answer for all the cards but they aren't the same.

I'm trying to avoid hung WU units.  Ultimately that will lead to more PPD simply because of stability.

So when the cards do finally run consistently it will be at about the highest speeds they can handle because I moved in such small steps.  However, I only moved in small steps because I had no idea how far I would have to reduce the GPU speeds.
curetheworld
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 21


View Profile
May 28, 2014, 05:01:43 AM
 #1876

We have 4 votes or likes so far on the Cryptsy post
https://cryptsy.freshdesk.com/support/discussions/topics/4000277225
Keep posting and adding your vote!

Curecoin has just reached top 20 on overall rank in the folding@home ranks!

ChasingTheDream
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 293


View Profile
May 28, 2014, 05:11:45 AM
 #1877

No where near as cpu bound as AMD too...  Roll Eyes
I want 4 GTX 880 reference cards (Titan style cooler please)

That would be great Smiley does anyone know when they come out?

I read that F@H doesn't handle the Maxwell architecture very well yet.  Hopefully that will be fixed by the time this beast comes out.
Tweek
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280

CoinTweak profitability charts


View Profile WWW
May 28, 2014, 06:11:23 AM
 #1878

Amd drivers are shit. Nvidia has beautiful unified drivers
I don't have any issues on my system with both a GTX 670 and an R9 280x in it. Both cards run stable, but AMD gets about double the PPD.

Legionnairez
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 162


View Profile
May 28, 2014, 06:38:28 AM
 #1879

Amd drivers are shit. Nvidia has beautiful unified drivers
I don't have any issues on my system with both a GTX 670 and an R9 280x in it. Both cards run stable, but AMD gets about double the PPD.
Interesting. I haven't really looked into this, but my R9 280x gives an estimated 120k-160k PPD, usually around 140K PPD. My gtx 680 gives me estimated 35K. I'm not seeing stuck WUs on either one. Bit disappointed at the 680 really, I'm thinking about selling it since it's really not that great at folding which I'll be focusing my efforts on from now on.
Tweek
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 280

CoinTweak profitability charts


View Profile WWW
May 28, 2014, 07:28:03 AM
 #1880

Amd drivers are shit. Nvidia has beautiful unified drivers
I don't have any issues on my system with both a GTX 670 and an R9 280x in it. Both cards run stable, but AMD gets about double the PPD.
Interesting. I haven't really looked into this, but my R9 280x gives an estimated 120k-160k PPD, usually around 140K PPD. My gtx 680 gives me estimated 35K. I'm not seeing stuck WUs on either one. Bit disappointed at the 680 really, I'm thinking about selling it since it's really not that great at folding which I'll be focusing my efforts on from now on.
My 280x is about 120-140k PPD as well, my 670 is about 65-75k PPD. You should use the beta driver on your GTX, that gave me a boost from 30-35k to the current.

Pages: « 1 ... 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 [94] 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 ... 221 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!