Bitcoin Forum
February 16, 2019, 06:49:19 PM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 »
  Print  
Author Topic: Wolf's XMR/BCN/DSH CPUMiner - 2x speed compared to LucasJones' - NEW 06/20/2014  (Read 545924 times)
sk00t3r
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 192
Merit: 100


View Profile
July 23, 2014, 01:39:14 PM
 #301

minerd-wolf-07-09-14 hits me hard with a decrease in performance. ~120 h/s

using minerd from cpuminer-multi-wolf-06-09-2014.zip ~190 h/s

CPU is a 12 core Xeon E5-2430 V2 Is this expected?

are you sure you are using the same number of threads in both cases?

I am using the same exact .bat file settings.
1550342959
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1550342959

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1550342959
Reply with quote  #2

1550342959
Report to moderator
1550342959
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1550342959

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1550342959
Reply with quote  #2

1550342959
Report to moderator
Your Bitcoin transactions
The Ultimate Bitcoin mixer
made truly anonymous.
with an advanced technology.
Mix coins
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1550342959
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1550342959

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1550342959
Reply with quote  #2

1550342959
Report to moderator
1550342959
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1550342959

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1550342959
Reply with quote  #2

1550342959
Report to moderator
CrashOD
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 41
Merit: 0



View Profile
July 23, 2014, 11:29:40 PM
 #302

minerd-wolf-07-09-14 hits me hard with a decrease in performance. ~120 h/s

using minerd from cpuminer-multi-wolf-06-09-2014.zip ~190 h/s

CPU is a 12 core Xeon E5-2430 V2 Is this expected?

I think that minerd-wolf-07-09-14 is only for non-AES-NI cpus. That would explain the drop in hashrate for you and why when I tried it at first I saw a major drop in speed.
sleepdog
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 183
Merit: 100


View Profile
July 24, 2014, 12:31:09 PM
 #303

Win64 binaries exist but require AES-NI.
If I compile from source should I be able to run it on a processor without AES-NI then?  I compiled it successfully in an Virtualbox Ubuntu 13.04 virtual machine (on a Win 7 host without AES-NI), but get:

Code:
[2014-05-31 09:46:38] Using JSON-RPC 2.0
[2014-05-31 09:46:38] 2 miner threads started, using 'cryptonight' algorithm.
Illegal instruction (core dumped)

upon starting up the miner.

Configure with --disable-aes-ni

Whereabouts do I need to put the "--disable-aes-ni" when compiling?
pallas
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1932
Merit: 1087


Black Belt Developer


View Profile
July 24, 2014, 12:39:46 PM
 #304

Whereabouts do I need to put the "--disable-aes-ni" when compiling?

./autogen.sh
CFLAGS='-march=native' ./configure --disable-aes-ni
make -j<numberofcores>

possibly "make clean" before "make"

sleepdog
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 183
Merit: 100


View Profile
July 24, 2014, 03:42:50 PM
 #305

Similar results here. I ran some tests with a dual E5520 server.

cpu-multi / LucasJones (these are the same thing, right?) v2.3.3 gets max 148 H/s and is pretty much always over 140.

Wolf's newly provided non-AES version gets 118 H/s max, with a range of 100 - 118.

Looks like any advantages of Wolf's miner come from the AES-NI code.

I've now complied and run Wolf's latest version on this same non-AES-NI machine under Linux and although there's a very slight improvement over windows it's still way slower than LucasJones' is under Windows.

So I can only assume my previous statement was correct and that any gains Wolf's version gives are down to the AES-NI parts of his code and you need a machine with AES-NI capable cpus to take full advantage of it.
sk00t3r
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 192
Merit: 100


View Profile
July 25, 2014, 01:28:46 PM
 #306

minerd-wolf-07-09-14 hits me hard with a decrease in performance. ~120 h/s

using minerd from cpuminer-multi-wolf-06-09-2014.zip ~190 h/s

CPU is a 12 core Xeon E5-2430 V2 Is this expected?

I think that minerd-wolf-07-09-14 is only for non-AES-NI cpus. That would explain the drop in hashrate for you and why when I tried it at first I saw a major drop in speed.

Thanks, guess I had a hard time reading lol. It clearly stated that it was for NON AES-NI. Not sure what I was thinking. THanks again.
JohnD
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 124
Merit: 100


View Profile WWW
July 31, 2014, 09:43:24 AM
 #307

I get this error when i try to compile it:

Code:
root@prox8:~/cpuminer-multi# ./autogen.sh
configure.ac:133: error: possibly undefined macro: AC_MSG_ERROR
      If this token and others are legitimate, please use m4_pattern_allow.
      See the Autoconf documentation.

How to solve that?

System is Debian wheezy 64bit.
equipoise
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 789
Merit: 1000


Monero (XMR) - secure, private, untraceable


View Profile WWW
July 31, 2014, 11:03:24 AM
 #308

I'm not sure this will work, but did you tried:
Code:
./autogen.sh -m4_pattern_allow

About me | zRMicroArray - phase 2 - Gene Expression Analysis software | [Weed Like to Talk - Bulgaria] Start a wave of cannabis seminars in Europe | Monero weighted average price stats: moneroprice.i2p
BTC: 1KoCX7TWKVGwqmmFw3CKyUSrKRSStueZar | NMC: NKhYEYpe1Le9MwHrwKsdSm5617J4toVar9 | XMR (Tip me a beer OpenAlias Monero address): tip.changetheworldwork.com
[XMR] Monero - A secure, private, untraceable cryptocurrency: 4AyRmUcxzefB5quumzK3HNE4zmCiGc8vhG6fE1oJpGVyVZF7fvDgSpt3MzgLfQ6Q1719xQhmfkM9Z2u NXgDMqYhjJVmc6KX
primer-
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000



View Profile
July 31, 2014, 11:06:04 AM
 #309

I get this error when i try to compile it:

Code:
root@prox8:~/cpuminer-multi# ./autogen.sh
configure.ac:133: error: possibly undefined macro: AC_MSG_ERROR
      If this token and others are legitimate, please use m4_pattern_allow.
      See the Autoconf documentation.

How to solve that?

System is Debian wheezy 64bit.

Compile latest autoconf from source.
ballot
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 970
Merit: 1000



View Profile
July 31, 2014, 09:43:32 PM
 #310

https://minergate.com/download/win32-cli

minergate has 32 bit miner but they restrict the pool  Cry Cry
Hotmetal
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378
Merit: 250


View Profile
August 02, 2014, 05:54:11 PM
 #311

Hey..

Firstly, thank you for the awesome CPUMiner. It works like a charm.

Is merged mining possible with your / Wof's CPUMiner?

http://bitcoin.stackexchange.com/questions/273/how-does-merged-mining-work
http://monetaverde.org/

Merged mining will allow you to mine MCN (MonetaVerde) in addition to to the major coin (XMR etc) without a reduction in hashrate.
I see its been asked before, but i was unable to find a conclusive response.

Regards,
Cami
Hotmetal
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378
Merit: 250


View Profile
August 02, 2014, 06:29:43 PM
 #312

Btw.. Just thought i'd mention this:

Latest CPUMiner compiled from git: (24 x Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5650 @ 2.67GHz)

Over a 20 minute duration:

[2014-08-02 20:25:25] accepted: 191/234 (81.62%), 230.74 H/s at diff 980 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-02 20:25:29] accepted: 192/235 (81.70%), 230.63 H/s at diff 980 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-02 20:25:29] accepted: 193/236 (81.78%), 230.61 H/s at diff 980 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-02 20:25:31] accepted: 194/237 (81.86%), 230.16 H/s at diff 980 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-02 20:25:40] accepted: 195/238 (81.93%), 231.01 H/s at diff 980 (yay!!!)

Then i removed all of the "optimizations" from the Makefile:

From:

am__append_3 = -Ofast -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -funroll-loops -fvariable-expansion-in-unroller -ftree-loop-if-convert-stores -fmerg
e-all-constants -fbranch-target-load-optimize2 -fsched2-use-superblocks -maes

to :

am__append_3 = -maes

The result?

[2014-08-02 20:26:44] accepted: 189/231 (81.82%), 289.83 H/s at diff 1384 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-02 20:26:45] accepted: 190/232 (81.90%), 290.09 H/s at diff 1384 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-02 20:27:03] accepted: 191/233 (81.97%), 291.41 H/s at diff 1384 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-02 20:27:07] accepted: 192/234 (82.05%), 290.47 H/s at diff 1384 (yay!!!)

There are numerous posts/warnings on-line about over-aggressive compile-time "optimizations".
Just thought I'd post my results/findings which concur.

Regards,
Cami
Hotmetal
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378
Merit: 250


View Profile
August 02, 2014, 07:45:18 PM
 #313

Each optimization I tested worked on my CPU - I don't have all CPUs, so I can't test. That much of a reduction is odd, though... are you sure the test wasn't affected by other factors?

It's quite a difference. I have 8 of those monster servers that are freshly installed (+updated) with Ubuntu 14.04.
They are all identical and unused (no running services, crons etc..) but the results are rather inconsistent across each so perhaps something else could be influencing things.
I'll dig a bit deeper and see if anything comes of it.
Hotmetal
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378
Merit: 250


View Profile
August 02, 2014, 07:54:41 PM
 #314

One thing I found rather interesting:

root@cami001:/# minerd --help
..
  -t, --threads=N       number of miner threads (default: number of processors)
..

root@cami001:/# grep processor /proc/cpuinfo | wc -l                     
24

root@cami001:/# /usr/local/bin/minerd -o stratum+tcp://x.x.x.x:x -p x -u xx
[2014-08-02 15:49:42] Using JSON-RPC 2.0
[2014-08-02 15:49:42] 31 miner threads started, using 'cryptonight' algorithm.
[2014-08-02 15:49:42] Starting Stratum on stratum+tcp://x.x.x.x:x

Out of interests sake, how/where is 31 processors being returned? If I set the thread count manually (-t 24), 24 threads are used and the H/S is extremely consistent.
dewdeded
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1218
Merit: 1011


Monero Evangelist


View Profile WWW
August 02, 2014, 08:16:06 PM
 #315

You have 48 cores? (2-Core-CPUs?)
PeaMine
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 781
Merit: 505



View Profile
August 03, 2014, 12:24:26 AM
 #316

Each optimization I tested worked on my CPU - I don't have all CPUs, so I can't test. That much of a reduction is odd, though... are you sure the test wasn't affected by other factors?

It's quite a difference. I have 8 of those monster servers that are freshly installed (+updated) with Ubuntu 14.04.
They are all identical and unused (no running services, crons etc..) but the results are rather inconsistent across each so perhaps something else could be influencing things.
I'll dig a bit deeper and see if anything comes of it.

Going to check this out as well, running it without the optimizations.

Datacenter Technician and Electrician
sandor111
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616
Merit: 500



View Profile WWW
August 03, 2014, 12:42:24 AM
 #317

Btw.. Just thought i'd mention this:

Latest CPUMiner compiled from git: (24 x Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5650 @ 2.67GHz)

Over a 20 minute duration:

[2014-08-02 20:25:25] accepted: 191/234 (81.62%), 230.74 H/s at diff 980 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-02 20:25:29] accepted: 192/235 (81.70%), 230.63 H/s at diff 980 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-02 20:25:29] accepted: 193/236 (81.78%), 230.61 H/s at diff 980 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-02 20:25:31] accepted: 194/237 (81.86%), 230.16 H/s at diff 980 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-02 20:25:40] accepted: 195/238 (81.93%), 231.01 H/s at diff 980 (yay!!!)

Then i removed all of the "optimizations" from the Makefile:

From:

am__append_3 = -Ofast -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -funroll-loops -fvariable-expansion-in-unroller -ftree-loop-if-convert-stores -fmerg
e-all-constants -fbranch-target-load-optimize2 -fsched2-use-superblocks -maes

to :

am__append_3 = -maes

The result?

[2014-08-02 20:26:44] accepted: 189/231 (81.82%), 289.83 H/s at diff 1384 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-02 20:26:45] accepted: 190/232 (81.90%), 290.09 H/s at diff 1384 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-02 20:27:03] accepted: 191/233 (81.97%), 291.41 H/s at diff 1384 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-02 20:27:07] accepted: 192/234 (82.05%), 290.47 H/s at diff 1384 (yay!!!)

There are numerous posts/warnings on-line about over-aggressive compile-time "optimizations".
Just thought I'd post my results/findings which concur.

Regards,
Cami

You should be getting atleast 400 H/s out of those CPUs (mine are hashing at 451 H/s)

PeaMine
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 781
Merit: 505



View Profile
August 03, 2014, 01:01:30 AM
Last edit: August 03, 2014, 03:49:33 AM by PeaMine
 #318

Each optimization I tested worked on my CPU - I don't have all CPUs, so I can't test. That much of a reduction is odd, though... are you sure the test wasn't affected by other factors?

It's quite a difference. I have 8 of those monster servers that are freshly installed (+updated) with Ubuntu 14.04.
They are all identical and unused (no running services, crons etc..) but the results are rather inconsistent across each so perhaps something else could be influencing things.
I'll dig a bit deeper and see if anything comes of it.

Going to check this out as well, running it without the optimizations.


Without optimizations:

[2014-08-03 00:58:53] accepted: 4/4 (100.00%), 195.91 H/s at diff 5000 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-03 00:59:04] accepted: 5/5 (100.00%), 195.29 H/s at diff 5000 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-03 00:59:07] accepted: 6/6 (100.00%), 194.45 H/s at diff 5000 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-03 00:59:08] accepted: 7/7 (100.00%), 194.69 H/s at diff 5000 (yay!!!)


With:
[2014-08-03 01:00:28] accepted: 3/3 (100.00%), 369.24 H/s at diff 5000 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-03 01:00:36] accepted: 4/4 (100.00%), 369.24 H/s at diff 5000 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-03 01:00:36] accepted: 5/5 (100.00%), 369.23 H/s at diff 5000 (yay!!!)
[2014-08-03 01:00:52] accepted: 6/6 (100.00%), 369.14 H/s at diff 5000 (yay!!!)

Crazy how efficient those optimizations are.
Though sadly needs to be around 440+ or so for current difficulty to break even.

Datacenter Technician and Electrician
Hotmetal
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378
Merit: 250


View Profile
August 03, 2014, 04:07:58 AM
 #319

You should be getting atleast 400 H/s out of those CPUs (mine are hashing at 451 H/s)

How though? I've tried on a variety of *very expensive* hardware from Dell.
Each has 100gigs of ram, 24 cpus, etc..

Ubuntu 14.04:

# sysctl -w vm.nr_hugepages=72  (confirmed that it is set)
# git clone https://github.com/wolf9466/cpuminer-multi.git
# cd cpuminer-multi
# ./autogen.sh
# ./configure CFLAGS="-march=native"
# make
# make install
# screen -d -m -S minerd /usr/local/bin/minerd -o stratum+tcp://mro.pool.minergate.com:45560 -p x -u x
# screen -r (after a few hours of running)
[2014-08-03 06:05:25] accepted: 3952/7916 (49.92%), 288.94 H/s at diff 444 (yay!!!)

example of hardware: 24 CPUs - Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2420 0 @ 1.90GHz
another example:       24 CPUs - Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5650  @ 2.67GHz



sandor111
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 616
Merit: 500



View Profile WWW
August 03, 2014, 10:29:44 AM
 #320

You should be getting atleast 400 H/s out of those CPUs (mine are hashing at 451 H/s)

How though? I've tried on a variety of *very expensive* hardware from Dell.
Each has 100gigs of ram, 24 cpus, etc..

Ubuntu 14.04:

# sysctl -w vm.nr_hugepages=72  (confirmed that it is set)
# git clone https://github.com/wolf9466/cpuminer-multi.git
# cd cpuminer-multi
# ./autogen.sh
# ./configure CFLAGS="-march=native"
# make
# make install
# screen -d -m -S minerd /usr/local/bin/minerd -o stratum+tcp://mro.pool.minergate.com:45560 -p x -u x
# screen -r (after a few hours of running)
[2014-08-03 06:05:25] accepted: 3952/7916 (49.92%), 288.94 H/s at diff 444 (yay!!!)

example of hardware: 24 CPUs - Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2420 0 @ 1.90GHz
another example:       24 CPUs - Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU X5650  @ 2.67GHz





Don't set threads equal to number of CPU threads, that is wrong.
The general rule is threads = floor(L3 cache / 1024)
Use this: num_threads=$(($(cat /proc/cpuinfo | grep "cache size" | uniq | cut -d":" -f2 | cut -d" " -f2)/1024))
Should be 12 for X5650

Pages: « 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 [16] 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 »
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Bitcointalk.org is not available or authorized for sale. Do not believe any fake listings.
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!