phzi
|
|
July 25, 2014, 06:58:44 AM |
|
I'm amazed we're still doing all this tweaking blindly with so much guesswork and trial and error. There's got to be a way to accurately and precisely measure what's possible/stable, based on the numbers alone.
Everybody's clocks have different tolerances. It'd be easier just to say stock clocks and unedited .cl files, but fuckit; gotta try and get that extra 200Kh/s. If you don't somebody else might. But why would they have different tolerances if they're built exactly the same? Are we talking differences in heat/humidity or something? GPU ASIC qualities vary significantly. Quite simply, no 2 GPUs will perform the same, and this is true even when you have cards with sequential serial numbers.
|
|
|
|
bullus
|
|
July 25, 2014, 08:07:26 AM Last edit: July 25, 2014, 10:55:27 AM by bullus |
|
Is this fast sgminer 4.2.2 - Started: [2014-07-25 09:47:50] - [0 days 00:18:36] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (5s):6.211M (avg):6.078Mh/s | A:2 R:0 HW:0 WU:0.083/m ST: 0 SS: 0 NB: 30 LW: 1796 GF: 1 RF: 0 Connected to am02 x11 (stratum) diff 0.013 as user xxxx Block: 204bc369... Diff:119 Started: [10:06:00] Best share: 1.946 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [P]ool management [G]PU management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit GPU 0: 72.0C 85% | 6.211M/6.092Mh/s | R: 0.0% HW:0 WU:0.084/m xI: 56 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GPU 0: 6.2 / 6.1 Mh/s | A:140 R:0 HW:0 U:8.81/m I:0 xI:56 rI:0 72.0 C F: 85% E: 1060 MHz M: 1500 Mhz V: 0.000V A: 100% P: 15% Last initialised: [2014-07-25 09:47:48] Thread 0: 3.1 Mh/s Enabled ALIVE Thread 1: 3.1 Mh/s Enabled ALIVE
[E]nable [D]isable [R]estart GPU [C]hange settings [I]ntensity E[x]perimental intensity R[a]w Intensity Or press any other key to continue No, it can be faster sgminer 4.2.2 - Started: [2014-07-25 09:47:50] - [0 days 00:40:34] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (5s):6.283M (avg):6.139Mh/s | A:3 R:0 HW:0 WU:0.087/m ST: 0 SS: 0 NB: 90 LW: 3952 GF: 1 RF: 0 Connected to am02 x11 (stratum) diff 0.012 as user xxxx Block: 683f926f... Diff:694 Started: [10:28:02] Best share: 1.946 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [P]ool management [G]PU management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit GPU 0: 73.0C 85% | 6.283M/6.145Mh/s | R: 0.0% HW:0 WU:0.087/m xI: 65 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GPU 0: 6.3 / 6.1 Mh/s | A:341 R:0 HW:0 U:8.81/m I:0 xI:65 rI:0 72.0 C F: 85% E: 1060 MHz M: 1500 Mhz V: 0.000V A: 100% P: 15% Last initialised: [2014-07-25 09:47:48] Thread 0: 3.1 Mh/s Enabled ALIVE Thread 1: 3.1 Mh/s Enabled ALIVE
[E]nable [D]isable [R]estart GPU [C]hange settings [I]ntensity E[x]perimental intensity R[a]w Intensity Or press any other key to continue
edit I notice a hashrate drop to below 6mh/s and rise back again with xI=65. Drop to xI=64 (6274kh/s) and is not dropping anymore.(10kh/s or so) Edit2 As u can see the Accepted shares are calculate fine in sgminer, but the above value isn't. Is it hard to change the above value to the value sgminer is showing with "G".? edit3 Still stable after 3 hours. Restarted and see if the other algos also be stable...6.346kh/s sgminer 4.2.2 - Started: [2014-07-25 12:33:01] - [0 days 00:19:21] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (5s):6.346M (avg):6.312Mh/s | A:2 R:0 HW:0 WU:0.083/m ST: 0 SS: 0 NB: 22 LW: 1825 GF: 1 RF: 0 Connected to am02 x11 multi (stratum) diff 0.014 as user xxxx Block: 2ef3e81b... Diff:1.11K Started: [12:51:30] Best share: 1.397 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [P]ool management [G]PU management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit GPU 0: 74.0C 85% | 6.352M/6.326Mh/s | R: 0.6% HW:0 WU:0.083/m xI: 64 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GPU 0: 6.4 / 6.3 Mh/s | A:174 R:1 HW:0 U:10.30/m I:0 xI:64 rI:0 73.0 C F: 85% E: 1060 MHz M: 1500 Mhz V: 0.000V A: 100% P: 10% Last initialised: [2014-07-25 12:33:00] Thread 0: 3.2 Mh/s Enabled ALIVE Thread 1: 3.2 Mh/s Enabled ALIVE
[E]nable [D]isable [R]estart GPU [C]hange settings [I]ntensity E[x]perimental intensity R[a]w Intensity Or press any other key to continue
|
btc 16LWhms487bzCxQWq5oeW8SMDPmU2rvQjf
|
|
|
rldep
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 9
Merit: 0
|
|
July 25, 2014, 09:37:35 AM |
|
Thanks to all who answered :-) --quiet|-q Disable logging output, display status and errors --log|-l <arg> Interval in seconds between log output (default: 5)
no, -q is very silent )) --log-file log.txt
It works!!! :-)
|
|
|
|
rldep
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 9
Merit: 0
|
|
July 25, 2014, 10:47:06 AM |
|
Your x11 hashrate will be dependent mostly on memclock speed, if you can hold at 1350, great, I can't though.
I didn't know that x[n] algorythms are sensitive to memory speed. Does it mean we must rise memory clock speed to achieve maximum hash rate at x11, x13, x15 ?
|
|
|
|
platinum4
|
|
July 25, 2014, 10:54:01 AM |
|
edit I notice a hashrate drop to below 6mh/s and rise back again with xI=65. Drop to xI=64 (6274kh/s) and is not dropping anymore.(10kh/s or so)
Interesting. I've noticed that xI:64 is a slight increase in performance on x11; but absolutely no increase in performance on x13/x14/x15. Sticking with xI: 50 still provides 4M solid on 290X on x15. I wanna see if we can get 4.1 somehow. I'm still stuck at WU: .056/m maximum on x15. Would be nice to increase it by .001-.003
|
|
|
|
platinum4
|
|
July 25, 2014, 10:54:56 AM |
|
Your x11 hashrate will be dependent mostly on memclock speed, if you can hold at 1350, great, I can't though.
I didn't know that x[n] algorythms are sensitive to memory speed. Does it mean we must rise memory clock speed to achieve maximum hash rate at x11, x13, x15 ? Raise that shit too high and you'll be holding down the power button and hard-resetting your hung rigs every 6 minutes.
|
|
|
|
bullus
|
|
July 25, 2014, 11:06:54 AM Last edit: July 25, 2014, 12:38:29 PM by bullus |
|
Your x11 hashrate will be dependent mostly on memclock speed, if you can hold at 1350, great, I can't though.
I didn't know that x[n] algorythms are sensitive to memory speed. Does it mean we must rise memory clock speed to achieve maximum hash rate at x11, x13, x15 ? Raise that shit too high and you'll be holding down the power button and hard-resetting your hung rigs every 6 minutes. Not with my Asus dcII 290x..still stable with 1500mem love my card x15 testing and running 4080kh/s 4100kh/s sgminer 4.2.2 - Started: [2014-07-25 12:33:01] - [0 days 01:07:01] -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- (5s):4.104M (avg):4.080Mh/s | A:3 R:0 HW:0 WU:0.059/m ST: 0 SS: 1 NB: 107 LW: 4080 GF: 0 RF: 0 Connected to am02 x15 (stratum) diff 0.007 as user bullus.3 Block: 40a76a3e... Diff:88 Started: [13:39:54] Best share: 26 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [P]ool management [G]PU management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit GPU 0: 74.0C 85% | 4.100M/4.084Mh/s | R: 0.6% HW:0 WU:0.060/m xI: 51 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- GPU 0: 4.1 / 4.1 Mh/s | A:345 R:2 HW:0 U:8.51/m I:0 xI:51 rI:0 73.0 C F: 85% E: 1060 MHz M: 1500 Mhz V: 0.000V A: 100% P: 10% Last initialised: [2014-07-25 12:57:15] Thread 0: 2.0 Mh/s Enabled ALIVE Thread 1: 2.0 Mh/s Enabled ALIVE
[E]nable [D]isable [R]estart GPU [C]hange settings [I]ntensity E[x]perimental intensity R[a]w Intensity Or press any other key to continue edit Final speeds Asus DCII 290X @1060/1500 stock Voltage (ratio 1:1.415) X11=6350 X13=4650 X15=4100 @1060/1425 X11=6305 X13=4585---> not much difference but with mem@1500 it does make difference X15=4005---> not much difference @1060/1350 X11=6200 X13=4585 X15=4000 @1050/1350 X11=6150 X13=4575 X15=3970 @1000/1415 (ratio 1:1.415) -> but can lower my voltage..let's see if hash/watt is better. X11=6170 X13=4560 X15=3990 { "profiles" : [ { "name" : "x11", "algorithm" : "darkcoin-mod", "xintensity" : "64", "gpu-threads" : "2", "worksize": "64" }, { "name" : "x13", "algorithm" : "marucoin-mod", "xintensity" : "51", "gpu-threads" : "2", "worksize": "64" }, { "name" : "x15", "algorithm" : "bitblock", "xintensity" : "51", "gpu-threads" : "2", "worksize": "64" }, { "name" : "nist5", "algorithm" : "talkcoin-mod", "intensity" : "16", "gpu-threads" : "2", "worksize": "64" } ], "default-profile": "x15", "hamsi-expand-big" : "7", "shaders" : "2816", "gpu-fan" : "85-100", "gpu-powertune" : "10", "gpu-vddc" : "0", "auto-fan" : true, "failover-only" : true, "expiry" : "1", "gpu-dyninterval" : "7", "hotplug" : "5", "log" : "5", "queue" : "0", "scan-time" : "1", "temp-hysteresis" : "2", "shares" : "0", "no-submit-stale" : true, "no-restart" : true, "failover-switch-delay" : "30", "show-coindiff" : true, "remove-disabled" : true, "extranonce-subscription" : true }
|
btc 16LWhms487bzCxQWq5oeW8SMDPmU2rvQjf
|
|
|
rldep
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 9
Merit: 0
|
|
July 25, 2014, 11:56:47 AM |
|
Raise that shit too high and you'll be holding down the power button and hard-resetting your hung rigs every 6 minutes.
You are prikolist! :-)) (Prikolist is a man who like jokes)
|
|
|
|
Singman33
|
|
July 25, 2014, 12:51:41 PM |
|
I'm testing latest GIT build of v5, and I have a few drop in hashrate compared to dedicated miners : This is for a R9 280X Tri-X Scrypt : v5 = 755 Kh/s, ref = 760 Kh/s, it's OK X11 : v5 = 3,2 Mh/s, ref = 3,5 Mh/s, it's less than using sph-sgminer_x11mod ( https://github.com/lasybear/sph-sgminer_x11mod) X13 : v5 = can't compile .cl files at start, should be a bug introduced recently, ref = 2,45 Mh/s (same as X11) Keccak : v5 = 380 Mh/s, ref = 370 Mh/s, OK Nist5 : v5 = 7 Mh/s, ref = 13 Mh/s, it's VERY BAD DROP ! Maybe I'm missing some important tweaking (each miner have his own configuration when using different kernels) but using V5 drop hashrate on most cases. If you have suggestions (config files), post them. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Accordus
Member
Offline
Activity: 86
Merit: 10
|
|
July 25, 2014, 01:17:24 PM |
|
I'm testing latest GIT build of v5, and I have a few drop in hashrate compared to dedicated miners : This is for a R9 280X Tri-X Scrypt : v5 = 755 Kh/s, ref = 760 Kh/s, it's OK X11 : v5 = 3,2 Mh/s, ref = 3,5 Mh/s, it's less than using sph-sgminer_x11mod ( https://github.com/lasybear/sph-sgminer_x11mod) X13 : v5 = can't compile .cl files at start, should be a bug introduced recently, ref = 2,45 Mh/s (same as X11) Keccak : v5 = 380 Mh/s, ref = 370 Mh/s, OK Nist5 : v5 = 7 Mh/s, ref = 13 Mh/s, it's VERY BAD DROP ! Maybe I'm missing some important tweaking (each miner have his own configuration when using different kernels) but using V5 drop hashrate on most cases. If you have suggestions (config files), post them. Thanks. Hmmmmm. I had much higher speeds. See this post of my collected miners and configs: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=514242.msg7982772#msg7982772My script was 725 kH/s. Other speeds: 4.3 MHs/card (= x5.9) for X11, @1480W for the total 8 cards 3.05 MHs/card (= x4.2) for X13, @1480W for the total 8 cards 2.955 MHs/card (= x4.1) for X15, @1560W for the total 8 cards 413 MHs/card (= x17.9) for NIST5, @1650W for the total 8 cards 6.2 MHs/card (= x6.2) for FRESH, @1350W for the total 8 cards 0.375 kHs(!)/card (= x0.00051) for Cryptonote, @1650W for the total 8 cards
|
|
|
|
Singman33
|
|
July 25, 2014, 02:55:53 PM |
|
No, u dont understand. I already have better hashrate with custom or dedicated miners, I just want to have the best hashrate (and if possible the same) with sgminer-dev-v5. Look like this version is missing a lot of optimizations from others miners.
|
|
|
|
badman74
|
|
July 25, 2014, 03:10:25 PM |
|
No, u dont understand. I already have better hashrate with custom or dedicated miners, I just want to have the best hashrate (and if possible the same) with sgminer-dev-v5. Look like this version is missing a lot of optimizations from others miners. try looking though this and see if any of the changes help you https://github.com/sgminer-dev/sgminer/issues/347
|
|
|
|
bullus
|
|
July 25, 2014, 03:29:28 PM |
|
Which binaries build is using the optimized x11 bin? Or do I still need the "higher bin" from the other miner?
|
btc 16LWhms487bzCxQWq5oeW8SMDPmU2rvQjf
|
|
|
Accordus
Member
Offline
Activity: 86
Merit: 10
|
|
July 25, 2014, 03:47:49 PM |
|
No, u dont understand. I already have better hashrate with custom or dedicated miners, I just want to have the best hashrate (and if possible the same) with sgminer-dev-v5. Look like this version is missing a lot of optimizations from others miners. Ahhh, OK, I see.
|
|
|
|
|
ebliever
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1708
Merit: 1036
|
|
July 25, 2014, 05:41:37 PM Last edit: July 25, 2014, 06:03:12 PM by ebliever |
|
edit I notice a hashrate drop to below 6mh/s and rise back again with xI=65. Drop to xI=64 (6274kh/s) and is not dropping anymore.(10kh/s or so) Edit2 As u can see the Accepted shares are calculate fine in sgminer, but the above value isn't. Is it hard to change the above value to the value sgminer is showing with "G".? edit3 Still stable after 3 hours. Restarted and see if the other algos also be stable...6.346kh/s Sigh... every time I get close someone has to leap farther ahead. Looks like you encountered the same thing I did with the x-65/x-64 threshold. I'm running x-68 since last night, averaging 5.96 Mhash/GPU across 4 290X's over 12 hours. Stable apart from a renter trying to load dead pools for a while, LOL. I get up to around 6.17 Mhash on one of the GPU's but they keep dropping off and don't hold consistently at the highest speeds. But I'm still at 1020/1350 on the clocks so that explains much of my shortfall, I'm sure. On scrypt I had all 4 of my GPU's individually tuned to four different engine and memory speeds for the fastest possible stable speed. I'm going to try the latest builds and settings you and badman74 helpfully shared, and then see if I can push individual GPU's higher. Thanks again! EDIT: Dumb question - I've never messed with voltage settings before as I didn't want to fry anything. But I see in bullus' profile that he has vddc set to 0. Does that mean "go with the default setting"? As I understand it the reference voltage on a 290X is 1.0 volt. So if I wanted to try cutting that by 10%, should I put "0.9" in the vddc line, or "-0.1"? Reading the docs would have me trying the former, but bullus' example makes me think the latter is right.
|
Luke 12:15-21
Ephesians 2:8-9
|
|
|
KiloWatts
Member
Offline
Activity: 119
Merit: 10
|
|
July 25, 2014, 06:07:08 PM |
|
Keep it up guys - people like you ensure GPU-mining will never die
|
|
|
|
bullus
|
|
July 25, 2014, 07:52:33 PM Last edit: July 25, 2014, 08:03:12 PM by bullus |
|
edit I notice a hashrate drop to below 6mh/s and rise back again with xI=65. Drop to xI=64 (6274kh/s) and is not dropping anymore.(10kh/s or so) Edit2 As u can see the Accepted shares are calculate fine in sgminer, but the above value isn't. Is it hard to change the above value to the value sgminer is showing with "G".? edit3 Still stable after 3 hours. Restarted and see if the other algos also be stable...6.346kh/s Sigh... every time I get close someone has to leap farther ahead. Looks like you encountered the same thing I did with the x-65/x-64 threshold. I'm running x-68 since last night, averaging 5.96 Mhash/GPU across 4 290X's over 12 hours. Stable apart from a renter trying to load dead pools for a while, LOL. I get up to around 6.17 Mhash on one of the GPU's but they keep dropping off and don't hold consistently at the highest speeds. But I'm still at 1020/1350 on the clocks so that explains much of my shortfall, I'm sure. On scrypt I had all 4 of my GPU's individually tuned to four different engine and memory speeds for the fastest possible stable speed. I'm going to try the latest builds and settings you and badman74 helpfully shared, and then see if I can push individual GPU's higher. Thanks again! EDIT: Dumb question - I've never messed with voltage settings before as I didn't want to fry anything. But I see in bullus' profile that he has vddc set to 0. Does that mean "go with the default setting"? As I understand it the reference voltage on a 290X is 1.0 volt. So if I wanted to try cutting that by 10%, should I put "0.9" in the vddc line, or "-0.1"? Reading the docs would have me trying the former, but bullus' example makes me think the latter is right. That's funny cause 1 renter told I was selling a 4.2mh/s rig but I have 9.8mh/s.(4x7950) At the graph at betarigs u see fluctuating hashrates but can't see that at sgminer like i saw it with xI=65.(290x) Average is still 9.6mh/s, a bit lower than normal, but no way 4.2mh/s. Is there a tweak for flat hashrates? Decreasing intensity? gpu-vddc is set at 0 ,because I set it with msi afterburner for testing. At github guide u should set it like "1.000"
|
btc 16LWhms487bzCxQWq5oeW8SMDPmU2rvQjf
|
|
|
bullus
|
|
July 25, 2014, 07:54:52 PM |
|
|
btc 16LWhms487bzCxQWq5oeW8SMDPmU2rvQjf
|
|
|
platinum4
|
|
July 25, 2014, 08:31:14 PM |
|
Keep it up guys - people like you ensure GPU-mining will never die Not dead; a hobby right now, it seems.
|
|
|
|
|