[ANN] sgminer v5 - optimized X11/X13/NeoScrypt/Lyra2RE/etc. kernel-switch miner

[DragonSlayer]

I hope someone would be willing to assist on this.  I took a step back and trying to compile Windows x86.  I got to step 4 to get Curl as listed below.

Code:

4. Curl
-------
- go to http://curl.haxx.se/download.html and download latest source (>=7.39.0) and extract it somewhere
- replace original curl winbuild\MakefileBuild.vc with provided winbuild\MakefileBuild.vc (corrected paths and static library names for VC)

x86 version:
- open Visual Studio Command Prompt (x86)
	- go to winbuild folder and execute:
		nmake -f Makefile.vc mode=static VC=13 WITH_DEVEL=C:\OpenSSL-Win32 WITH_SSL=static ENABLE_SSPI=no ENABLE_IPV6=no ENABLE_IDN=no GEN_PDB=no DEBUG=no MACHINE=x86
	- copy builds\libcurl-vc10-x86-release-static-ssl-static-spnego\lib\libcurl_a.lib to winbuild\dist\lib\x86
	- copy builds	\libcurl-vc10-x86-release-static-ssl-static-spnego\include\* winbuild\dist\include\

First, am I to move MakefileBuild.vc from sgminer source to extracted curl or the other way from extracted curl to sgminer source?  I have tried both and get same errors.

Errors

Code:

C:\Users\Kenneth\Downloads\curl-7.39.0\curl-7.39.0\winbuild>nmake -f Makefile.vc
 mode=static VC=13 WITH_DEVEL=C:\OpenSSL-Win32 WITH_SSL=static ENABLE_SSPI=no EN
ABLE_IPV6=no ENABLE_IDN=no GEN_PDB=no DEBUG=no MACHINE=x86

Microsoft (R) Program Maintenance Utility Version 11.00.60610.1
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation.  All rights reserved.

configuration name: libcurl-vc13-x86-release-static-ssl-static
        cl.exe /O2 /DNDEBUG /MT /DCURL_STATICLIB /I. /I ../lib /I../include /nol
ogo /W3 /EHsc /DWIN32 /FD /c /DBUILDING_LIBCURL /I"C:\OpenSSL-Win32/include" /DU
SE_SSLEAY /I"C:\OpenSSL-Win32/include/openssl"  /DHAVE_SPNEGO /Fo"..\builds\libc
url-vc13-x86-release-static-ssl-static-obj-lib/file.obj"  ..\lib\file.c
file.c
c:\users\kenneth\downloads\curl-7.39.0\curl-7.39.0\lib\curl_setup.h(247) : fatal
 error C1083: Cannot open include file: 'winsock2.h': No such file or directory
NMAKE : fatal error U1077: '"C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 11.0
\VC\BIN\cl.exe"' : return code '0x2'
Stop.
NMAKE : fatal error U1077: '"C:\Program Files (x86)\Microsoft Visual Studio 11.0
\VC\BIN\nmake.exe"' : return code '0x2'
Stop.

What could be causing these errors?

Thanks
Klaian

[jch9678]

Any suggestions for my 290x Neoscrypt settings? Not sure what I am doing wrong to get such crap results. Also how are my 7970/7950 speeds? Running sgminer 5.1.0-dev. Maybe I am using a crap bin or neoscrypt.cl?

290x = 291kh/s (1100mhz core / 1450mhz memory)
--thread-concurrency 8192 -I 13 -g 2 --worksize 96

7970 = 322kh/s (1100mhz core / 1600mhz memory)
7950 = 272kh/s (1000mhz core / 1500mhz memory)
--thread-concurrency 8192 --xintensity 3 -g 2 --worksize 64

I seem to get great results if using xI of 3 or 2 without using TC and a worksize of 64, but I get constant HW errors. As soon as I add TC then no more HW errors, but speeds drop hard.

That's pretty good for the stock miner.

Really? 7970 outpacing the 290x. Sucks for me at least it seems that Neoscrypt is dying off in terms of profitability so hopefully x11 or x13 go back up.

290X can get a little higher, but not much more than the 7970.

Any suggestions on settings?

for your 290x try thread concurrency of 16384, xintensity of 3, 2 threads, and worksize 64.  I get more than 300 kh/s with those settings with a reference 290x at stock clocks (1000/1250).  I'm interested to see what you get. 

[yudhistira]

Hi guys   

is any newest bin files increasing more speed

r9 280x

x11 6.7 MHs
x13 4.7 MHs
x15 33 MHs

error on lyra, neoscrypt
miner always crash and reboot

[cat77]

Last night I read through the OpenCL manual and AMD optimization guides...

4x 280x  1020MHz GpuClock / 1499 Memclock
Catalyst 14.4 driver with 14.6 CL files in the sgminer folder
and a few modifications to that slow ass Nicehash neoscrypt.cl file
1440 Kh/s using 720Watts at the wall, undervolted at 1.025V

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bx2VQJcXD3ISdkJHNkZPS2lQUk0/view?usp=sharing

fastkdf is slow.  Byte alignment improves things.

[cat77]

I get nothing but HW errors when I restructure SMix.  No doubt I have something wrong.

[damm315er]

Try 13, like damm315er is using.

Thx wolf, 13 is giving me 240. Still far away from +300

Try xI 3 or 4, but specify thread concurrency with it. Set it to 16384.

Also, what clocks?

I know this was a while ago but ystarnaud said that xintensity and rawintensity are unused.  

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=632503.msg9475388#msg9475388

That was on Nov. 7 so I guess xI does now work with neo.  That's good news I was about to make a bunch of bins with different intensities with the 13.12 drivers and then upgrade to 14.6 rc2.  Is making bins with 13.12 a waste of time?

xI works on SG5 dev, and the wolf build. (although I've had crap luck using both xintensity and rawintensity because my GPU's are in the bottlenecked category)

The bin creation then driver upgrade isn't required for SGminer, it is only required on CGminer.  With SGminer, install the 14.9 or later drivers on the machine, and drop the 14.6 files in the SGminer folder.

Last I knew, to solo mine still requires CGminer tho.  Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

Using 13.12 isn't required at all with my kernels, whether you use CGMiner or SGMiner. Solo mining requires CGMiner - SGMiner cannot do it currently.

True, 13.12 was only needed with the original kernel, Wolf's likes 14.6.

Thanks guys, I appreciate it. Unfortunately, I missed these replies and went ahead and tested with 13.12.  That's a couple hours I'd like to have back.  Is there a particular reason you like installing >14.9 drivers and then drop the 14.6 files into the directory?  I usually just use 14.6 rc2.  Maybe it's more stable?, my new windows install seems to have developed stability issues.

Hashrate is better, by enough that it is worth it for me to take the time.  (sorry, been busy last couple days)

The only stability issues that I have is running multiminer, since my rig crashed on install of the .net upgrades, and reinstalling them doesn't fix it.

[deznuts]

Any suggestions for my 290x Neoscrypt settings? Not sure what I am doing wrong to get such crap results. Also how are my 7970/7950 speeds? Running sgminer 5.1.0-dev. Maybe I am using a crap bin or neoscrypt.cl?

290x = 291kh/s (1100mhz core / 1450mhz memory)
--thread-concurrency 8192 -I 13 -g 2 --worksize 96

7970 = 322kh/s (1100mhz core / 1600mhz memory)
7950 = 272kh/s (1000mhz core / 1500mhz memory)
--thread-concurrency 8192 --xintensity 3 -g 2 --worksize 64

I seem to get great results if using xI of 3 or 2 without using TC and a worksize of 64, but I get constant HW errors. As soon as I add TC then no more HW errors, but speeds drop hard.

That's pretty good for the stock miner.

Really? 7970 outpacing the 290x. Sucks for me at least it seems that Neoscrypt is dying off in terms of profitability so hopefully x11 or x13 go back up.

290X can get a little higher, but not much more than the 7970.

Any suggestions on settings?

for your 290x try thread concurrency of 16384, xintensity of 3, 2 threads, and worksize 64.  I get more than 300 kh/s with those settings with a reference 290x at stock clocks (1000/1250).  I'm interested to see what you get. 

281kh/s. It went down from my previous settings.

[damm315er]

Still creeping up on the speed of the 290's on neoscrypt, with the stock kernel... (GPU 2 & 3)

I do like the Sapphire Tri-xx 290, although the trixx s/w is for crap..

[jch9678]

Any suggestions for my 290x Neoscrypt settings? Not sure what I am doing wrong to get such crap results. Also how are my 7970/7950 speeds? Running sgminer 5.1.0-dev. Maybe I am using a crap bin or neoscrypt.cl?

290x = 291kh/s (1100mhz core / 1450mhz memory)
--thread-concurrency 8192 -I 13 -g 2 --worksize 96

7970 = 322kh/s (1100mhz core / 1600mhz memory)
7950 = 272kh/s (1000mhz core / 1500mhz memory)
--thread-concurrency 8192 --xintensity 3 -g 2 --worksize 64

I seem to get great results if using xI of 3 or 2 without using TC and a worksize of 64, but I get constant HW errors. As soon as I add TC then no more HW errors, but speeds drop hard.

That's pretty good for the stock miner.

Really? 7970 outpacing the 290x. Sucks for me at least it seems that Neoscrypt is dying off in terms of profitability so hopefully x11 or x13 go back up.

290X can get a little higher, but not much more than the 7970.

Any suggestions on settings?

for your 290x try thread concurrency of 16384, xintensity of 3, 2 threads, and worksize 64.  I get more than 300 kh/s with those settings with a reference 290x at stock clocks (1000/1250).  I'm interested to see what you get. 

281kh/s. It went down from my previous settings.

Well I tried your settings and a bunch of others and I can't seem to break 307 with stock clocks.  Which confirms what wolf0 and zuikkis and damm315er alluded to, there is a big bottleneck in the kernel. 

Wolf0 and Zuikkis, after your kernel optimizations did you have to make significant changes in your config or is it pretty much the same?

Also what is up with Work Utility?  It varies so much depending on what is in the config.

[jch9678]

Still creeping up on the speed of the 290's on neoscrypt, with the stock kernel... (GPU 2 & 3)

I do like the Sapphire Tri-xx 290, although the trixx s/w is for crap..

So you're hitting 330+ with a 290 and I can get close to 320 with a 290x overclocked to 1040/1500.  Do you think this is due to you using 14.9 drivers and dropping the 14.6 files into the mining directory, whereas I'm just using 14.6?  Have you observed any benefit/negatives for X11 or other coins when you do this?

[damm315er]

Still creeping up on the speed of the 290's on neoscrypt, with the stock kernel... (GPU 2 & 3)

I do like the Sapphire Tri-xx 290, although the trixx s/w is for crap..

So you're hitting 330+ with a 290 and I can get close to 320 with a 290x overclocked to 1040/1500.  Do you think this is due to you using 14.9 drivers and dropping the 14.6 files into the mining directory, whereas I'm just using 14.6?  Have you observed any benefit/negatives for X11 or other coins when you do this?

LOL, at least you can get ~320 with your 290x, I can only get ~310 before the HW start climbing..  Stupid Elpida memory is what I'm blaming for that. (XFX 290X)

That speed is due to a lot of things.  One of them is the 14.6/14.9 drivers, another is the wolf compiled 64 bit version of SG5.1, and of course the 2 big keys are the wolf kernel and hours of trial and error.

Never tried the driver change on the other algo's, as my first venture outside scrypt was being involved in the early beta testing of neoscrypt for GPU's, and to get any speed at all the driver switch had to be made.

[MaxDZ8]

Speaking about driver versions... any update on omega driver (14.12) compatibility? I cannot get this to hash correctly on my system, no matter what, I only get HW errors.

Original Vehre miner runs with no problems.

[jch9678]

Still creeping up on the speed of the 290's on neoscrypt, with the stock kernel... (GPU 2 & 3)

I do like the Sapphire Tri-xx 290, although the trixx s/w is for crap..

So you're hitting 330+ with a 290 and I can get close to 320 with a 290x overclocked to 1040/1500.  Do you think this is due to you using 14.9 drivers and dropping the 14.6 files into the mining directory, whereas I'm just using 14.6?  Have you observed any benefit/negatives for X11 or other coins when you do this?

LOL, at least you can get ~320 with your 290x, I can only get ~310 before the HW start climbing..  Stupid Elpida memory is what I'm blaming for that. (XFX 290X)

That speed is due to a lot of things.  One of them is the 14.6/14.9 drivers, another is the wolf compiled 64 bit version of SG5.1, and of course the 2 big keys are the wolf kernel and hours of trial and error.

Never tried the driver change on the other algo's, as my first venture outside scrypt was being involved in the early beta testing of neoscrypt for GPU's, and to get any speed at all the driver switch had to be made.

I don't think elpida memory could account for such a wide discrepancy in the hash or the HW errors.  At the very least a 290x should be equal with a 290, the only difference is the number of shaders at least for a reference card.  If it was a hynix 290x hitting 330+ and an elpida 290x hitting 310, then maybe I could understand.  I've got a hynix 290x in my test rig and I forgot what the other one is but I can test.  I realize you spent hours on your config for your 290 but if you feel like showing it I can start from there.  I've got 14.6 rc2 installed on the test rig and I'm going to install 14.9 tonight and drop the 14.6 in the mining directory (I also use wolf0's builds).  Do you use Stilt's bios?  I couldn't get stilt's bios stable for the X coins but I wonder if it will work for neoscrypt.  Maybe Stilt on neoscrypt will let us find the right ratio of gpu to memory clock (if neoscrypt is anything like scrypt).  Sad thing is this really doesn't make too much of a difference in profit. 

[tZKtdvt6]

Here you can observe my AMD Shaphire 7970 working. It is incredibly fast.

Thank you very much.

[damm315er]

I don't think elpida memory could account for such a wide discrepancy in the hash or the HW errors.  At the very least a 290x should be equal with a 290, the only difference is the number of shaders at least for a reference card.  If it was a hynix 290x hitting 330+ and an elpida 290x hitting 310, then maybe I could understand.  I've got a hynix 290x in my test rig and I forgot what the other one is but I can test.  I realize you spent hours on your config for your 290 but if you feel like showing it I can start from there.  I've got 14.6 rc2 installed on the test rig and I'm going to install 14.9 tonight and drop the 14.6 in the mining directory (I also use wolf0's builds).  Do you use Stilt's bios?  I couldn't get stilt's bios stable for the X coins but I wonder if it will work for neoscrypt.  Maybe Stilt on neoscrypt will let us find the right ratio of gpu to memory clock (if neoscrypt is anything like scrypt).  Sad thing is this really doesn't make too much of a difference in profit. 

Yeah, right from the get-go tuning the GPU's for neoscrypt (and tuning them for scrypt as well) using the exact same settings would typically get the 290's with Hynix more hash than the 290x's with elpida.  Then once that peaked I split them off in different directions for tuning.

There was a single setting where the 290x got more hash than the 290, but that was back in the 30 to 60 kh/s range and was never repeatable with the newer kernel and drivers, even with the same settings.

It may be more than just the hynix/elpida thing, it could be in the card hardware or bios (never tried stilts).  I never dug deeper than the memory after I figured out why the 290's were outpacing the 290x's mining scrypt.  But, when I was doing scrypt the hashrates were much closer, so it could also be that the bottleneck in the kernel affects the 290x worse.

And you have another good point..  At this time hashrate isn't good for much more than bragging rights unless you have a farm..  I heard via the rumor mill that there's a massive GPU farm getting built.  If that is true, then unless there's some attractive new coins to draw the hash, the GPU mine-able coins are all going to get diluted even further.  It would help if BTC weren't tanking, but there was a big hype bubble to recover from..

[kopam]

Hey, so i started testing neoscrypt configs, but i have no idea what i am aiming for.
Can anyone share what is the most you can get from 7950 ? I am getting around 220kh/s. Is that good ? can i get more then that ?

Cheers

[damm315er]

Hey, so i started testing neoscrypt configs, but i have no idea what i am aiming for.
Can anyone share what is the most you can get from 7950 ? I am getting around 220kh/s. Is that good ? can i get more then that ?

Cheers

Looks like you can get a little more.. 

http://hw.neoscrypt.tk/index.php

[kopam]

Hey, so i started testing neoscrypt configs, but i have no idea what i am aiming for.
Can anyone share what is the most you can get from 7950 ? I am getting around 220kh/s. Is that good ? can i get more then that ?

Cheers

Looks like you can get a little more.. 

http://hw.neoscrypt.tk/index.php

I actually got them up to 260 but i am still wondering if i can get more out of them. I am using sgminer5.1-dev

I would like to know what is the best some one got out of this cards or from any cards actually.
I mean any optimized hidden super secret kernel etc
Just wondering what is the max at this moment.

[jch9678]

I don't think elpida memory could account for such a wide discrepancy in the hash or the HW errors.  At the very least a 290x should be equal with a 290, the only difference is the number of shaders at least for a reference card.  If it was a hynix 290x hitting 330+ and an elpida 290x hitting 310, then maybe I could understand.  I've got a hynix 290x in my test rig and I forgot what the other one is but I can test.  I realize you spent hours on your config for your 290 but if you feel like showing it I can start from there.  I've got 14.6 rc2 installed on the test rig and I'm going to install 14.9 tonight and drop the 14.6 in the mining directory (I also use wolf0's builds).  Do you use Stilt's bios?  I couldn't get stilt's bios stable for the X coins but I wonder if it will work for neoscrypt.  Maybe Stilt on neoscrypt will let us find the right ratio of gpu to memory clock (if neoscrypt is anything like scrypt).  Sad thing is this really doesn't make too much of a difference in profit. 

Yeah, right from the get-go tuning the GPU's for neoscrypt (and tuning them for scrypt as well) using the exact same settings would typically get the 290's with Hynix more hash than the 290x's with elpida.  Then once that peaked I split them off in different directions for tuning.

There was a single setting where the 290x got more hash than the 290, but that was back in the 30 to 60 kh/s range and was never repeatable with the newer kernel and drivers, even with the same settings.

It may be more than just the hynix/elpida thing, it could be in the card hardware or bios (never tried stilts).  I never dug deeper than the memory after I figured out why the 290's were outpacing the 290x's mining scrypt.  But, when I was doing scrypt the hashrates were much closer, so it could also be that the bottleneck in the kernel affects the 290x worse.

And you have another good point..  At this time hashrate isn't good for much more than bragging rights unless you have a farm..  I heard via the rumor mill that there's a massive GPU farm getting built.  If that is true, then unless there's some attractive new coins to draw the hash, the GPU mine-able coins are all going to get diluted even further.  It would help if BTC weren't tanking, but there was a big hype bubble to recover from..

My elpida 290x's always outperformed my hynix 290s, especially with Stilt's bios.  Stilt's bios was stable for the 2 hynix 290x on my test rig mining neoscrypt but it didn't seem to make a difference in the max hash I could get.  With either bios I could squeeze out about 330kh/s by overclocking to 1070/1500.  There was no magic ratio that I could find but that may be because I'm running the stock kernel.  I have a feeling stilt's bios may help out with a better kernel, if not for performance then for energy savings.  The core clock doesn't influence hash that much which is something wolf0 and others have said, ie crank up the memory speed and downclock the core for energy savings.

Testing the different drivers didn't make a difference to me, in fact I saw a slight increase in just sticking with 14.6rc2, as opposed to using 14.9 and 14.6 ocl files.  Maybe you play games and 14.9 is better for that but I don't use these for gaming.  Testing different settings didn't really make too much of a difference either, TCs of 8192, 8448, 16384, 22500 (I used that for scrypt-n) and 22528 and different worksizes didn't produce a significant change.  The 290 kernel bottleneck is a problem. 

I wouldn't worry to much about a massive gpu farm.  I don't think it will matter too much, there will always be new farmers and some will also leave.  Now if it's wolf0's farm then maybe that would be something to worry about,   But thanks to his hawaii bin, x11 is much more profitable for me than neoscrypt.

Anyway

[damm315er]

Hey, so i started testing neoscrypt configs, but i have no idea what i am aiming for.
Can anyone share what is the most you can get from 7950 ? I am getting around 220kh/s. Is that good ? can i get more then that ?

Cheers

Looks like you can get a little more.. 

http://hw.neoscrypt.tk/index.php

I actually got them up to 260 but i am still wondering if i can get more out of them. I am using sgminer5.1-dev

I would like to know what is the best some one got out of this cards or from any cards actually.
I mean any optimized hidden super secret kernel etc
Just wondering what is the max at this moment.

Around 600kh/s out of 290X.

You should be able to top that with a 295x2..