Bitcoin Forum
July 03, 2020, 11:25:59 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.20.0 [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 546348 times)
5w00p
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644
Merit: 502



View Profile
August 06, 2014, 03:28:17 AM
 #341

1600 H/s:

4x Opteron 6344 (48 physical cores @ 2.6ghz static)
64G ram (12x4GB ddr3-
14.04, built from wolf's git source

inside KVM with cpu-passthrough (couldn't get it to run on 12.04 which is host's bare metal OS, could potentially be faster)
sysctl -w vm.nr_hugepages=144

pool reporting > 2kh, miner at 1600-1650kh/s.



Could probably get better performance by a) running it on baremetal, b) using numactl and a better task scheduler.



I hit 1030 or so with 23 threads on AWS - you probably need to reduce your thread count.

Wolf, why would he want to REDUCE his hashrate?

He reports 1600 hash/sec and you report 1030.  Huh

Because he has 48 physical cores, I had 16.

OK. What AWS instance type has Opterons?
1593775559
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1593775559

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1593775559
Reply with quote  #2

1593775559
Report to moderator
1593775559
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1593775559

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1593775559
Reply with quote  #2

1593775559
Report to moderator
1593775559
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1593775559

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1593775559
Reply with quote  #2

1593775559
Report to moderator
Million $ Jackpots All Fully Insured Dozens Of Global Lottos & Syndicates 20% Bonus For Free Regular Free Promotions The World's Biggest Jackpots In Cryptocurrency Play Now Play Now
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1593775559
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1593775559

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1593775559
Reply with quote  #2

1593775559
Report to moderator
1593775559
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1593775559

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1593775559
Reply with quote  #2

1593775559
Report to moderator
1593775559
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1593775559

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1593775559
Reply with quote  #2

1593775559
Report to moderator
5w00p
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644
Merit: 502



View Profile
August 06, 2014, 03:38:34 AM
 #342

OK.  What instance type did you get 1030 hash/sec on 16 cores?
tgt
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 19
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 06, 2014, 06:40:40 PM
Last edit: August 06, 2014, 06:53:19 PM by tgt
 #343

It's fully utilizing the cores (minus one for some reason... maybe the scheduler thread is included in the thread limit?) so I can't see a huge gain other than running it on bare metal.

The opteron cores are not as efficient per ghz as the haswells.  The only advantage is that you have physical cores without any hyperthreading.  I'll try and compile the miner on 12.04 to run it on bare metal and see what/if any advantages are seen vs running it kvm with cpu passthrough.

The server is about $3300, so it's not exactly cost effective.  Just fun to see.

edit: just noticed the instructions to install it on 12.04, derp.

http://i.imgur.com/iH7vs4r.png
primer-
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000



View Profile
August 06, 2014, 07:13:44 PM
 #344

It's fully utilizing the cores (minus one for some reason... maybe the scheduler thread is included in the thread limit?) so I can't see a huge gain other than running it on bare metal.

The opteron cores are not as efficient per ghz as the haswells.  The only advantage is that you have physical cores without any hyperthreading.  I'll try and compile the miner on 12.04 to run it on bare metal and see what/if any advantages are seen vs running it kvm with cpu passthrough.

The server is about $3300, so it's not exactly cost effective.  Just fun to see.

edit: just noticed the instructions to install it on 12.04, derp.



What do you get when running on only 24 cores ?
PeaMine
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 829
Merit: 506



View Profile
August 07, 2014, 04:35:20 AM
 #345

It's fully utilizing the cores (minus one for some reason... maybe the scheduler thread is included in the thread limit?) so I can't see a huge gain other than running it on bare metal.

The opteron cores are not as efficient per ghz as the haswells.  The only advantage is that you have physical cores without any hyperthreading.  I'll try and compile the miner on 12.04 to run it on bare metal and see what/if any advantages are seen vs running it kvm with cpu passthrough.

The server is about $3300, so it's not exactly cost effective.  Just fun to see.

edit: just noticed the instructions to install it on 12.04, derp.


Is that the 16 core Intel system or the AMD 48 core?

Datacenter Technician and Electrician.  If you have any questions feel free to ask me as I am generally bored looking at logs and happy to help during free time.
5w00p
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 644
Merit: 502



View Profile
August 07, 2014, 09:24:30 PM
 #346

It's fully utilizing the cores (minus one for some reason... maybe the scheduler thread is included in the thread limit?) so I can't see a huge gain other than running it on bare metal.

The opteron cores are not as efficient per ghz as the haswells.  The only advantage is that you have physical cores without any hyperthreading.  I'll try and compile the miner on 12.04 to run it on bare metal and see what/if any advantages are seen vs running it kvm with cpu passthrough.

The server is about $3300, so it's not exactly cost effective.  Just fun to see.

edit: just noticed the instructions to install it on 12.04, derp.


Is that the 16 core Intel system or the AMD 48 core?

methinks its the Opteron machine.

Wolf0, thanks for sharing.  I should not be surprised that the coder of the miner is very effective at managing his rented rigs, and I am not really, but I gotta say that your ~64 h/s/core is quite impressive on the c3.8xlarge instances. 
slb
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 598
Merit: 501


View Profile WWW
August 08, 2014, 02:48:37 PM
 #347

Hi,
I am trying to compile on Mac, but I receive this error when I 'make'
Quote
make[3]: Nothing to be done for `all-am'.
gcc -DHAVE_CONFIG_H -I.  -pthread   -Qunused-arguments -falign-loops=16 -falign-functions=16 -falign-jumps=16 -falign-labels=16  -Ofast -flto -fuse-linker-plugin -funroll-loops -fvariable-expansion-in-unroller -ftree-loop-if-convert-stores -fmerge-all-constants -fbranch-target-load-optimize2 -fsched2-use-superblocks -maes   -MT minerd-cpu-miner.o -MD -MP -MF .deps/minerd-cpu-miner.Tpo -c -o minerd-cpu-miner.o `test -f 'cpu-miner.c' || echo './'`cpu-miner.c
clang: error: unknown argument: '-falign-loops=16' [-Wunused-command-line-argument-hard-error-in-future]
clang: note: this will be a hard error (cannot be downgraded to a warning) in the future
clang: error: unknown argument: '-falign-jumps=16' [-Wunused-command-line-argument-hard-error-in-future]
clang: note: this will be a hard error (cannot be downgraded to a warning) in the future
clang: error: unknown argument: '-falign-labels=16' [-Wunused-command-line-argument-hard-error-in-future]
clang: note: this will be a hard error (cannot be downgraded to a warning) in the future
clang: error: unknown argument: '-fuse-linker-plugin' [-Wunused-command-line-argument-hard-error-in-future]
clang: note: this will be a hard error (cannot be downgraded to a warning) in the future
clang: error: unknown argument: '-fvariable-expansion-in-unroller' [-Wunused-command-line-argument-hard-error-in-future]
clang: note: this will be a hard error (cannot be downgraded to a warning) in the future
clang: error: unknown argument: '-ftree-loop-if-convert-stores' [-Wunused-command-line-argument-hard-error-in-future]
clang: note: this will be a hard error (cannot be downgraded to a warning) in the future
clang: error: unknown argument: '-fbranch-target-load-optimize2' [-Wunused-command-line-argument-hard-error-in-future]
clang: note: this will be a hard error (cannot be downgraded to a warning) in the future
clang: error: unknown argument: '-fsched2-use-superblocks' [-Wunused-command-line-argument-hard-error-in-future]
clang: note: this will be a hard error (cannot be downgraded to a warning) in the future
make[2]: *** [minerd-cpu-miner.o] Error 1
make[1]: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
make: *** [all] Error 2

I have the dependencies installed. 'autogen.sh' and 'configure' run without errors.

Forknote (create cryptocurrenies easy) - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1079306.0
Dashcoin (anonymous cryptocurrency) - https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1020627.0
tgt
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 19
Merit: 0


View Profile
August 09, 2014, 01:31:28 AM
 #348

It's fully utilizing the cores (minus one for some reason... maybe the scheduler thread is included in the thread limit?) so I can't see a huge gain other than running it on bare metal.

The opteron cores are not as efficient per ghz as the haswells.  The only advantage is that you have physical cores without any hyperthreading.  I'll try and compile the miner on 12.04 to run it on bare metal and see what/if any advantages are seen vs running it kvm with cpu passthrough.

The server is about $3300, so it's not exactly cost effective.  Just fun to see.

edit: just noticed the instructions to install it on 12.04, derp.

http://i.imgur.com/iH7vs4r.png
Is that the 16 core Intel system or the AMD 48 core?

methinks its the Opteron machine.

Wolf0, thanks for sharing.  I should not be surprised that the coder of the miner is very effective at managing his rented rigs, and I am not really, but I gotta say that your ~64 h/s/core is quite impressive on the c3.8xlarge instances.  

Actually, I can get 70H/s/core on c3.8xlarge, 64H/s/core is just with this miner...

I get 64H/core on my opteron...  the speed actually tops out at 26 cores (26*64=1664H/s same as in the screenshot).  I guess that's L3 bandwidth limit - It's amusing to see how intel and amd are virtually identical per core due to this similar cache speed limitation.  Pushing numactl to force workloads onto physical cores/cache pairs didn't make a difference.
nioc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624
Merit: 1008


View Profile
August 09, 2014, 01:45:15 AM
 #349

i5-3450 windows 7

Downloaded both the 06-09-2014 Wolf miner and the LucasJones miner.  Wolf is 5% faster according to the numbers the miners display.
PeaMine
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 829
Merit: 506



View Profile
August 09, 2014, 03:24:19 AM
 #350

Anyone have any ideal performance/cost CPU desktop/server builds for XMR?
Thinking about buy a new single/dual CPU setup for this + gaming rig and GPU mine also.
AMD has some cheap setups, but don't want to waste money, but I also want to buy something on newegg with BTC....though the 10% discount expired I think =(

Datacenter Technician and Electrician.  If you have any questions feel free to ask me as I am generally bored looking at logs and happy to help during free time.
Hotmetal
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 378
Merit: 250


View Profile
August 09, 2014, 05:10:48 PM
 #351

Anyone have any ideal performance/cost CPU desktop/server builds for XMR?
Thinking about buy a new single/dual CPU setup for this + gaming rig and GPU mine also.
AMD has some cheap setups, but don't want to waste money, but I also want to buy something on newegg with BTC....though the 10% discount expired I think =(

I'm uncertain of the CPU side (cost vs performance).

GPU wise, merged mining (XMR+FCN) on a GeForce GTX 750 Ti hits 220->250 h/s. (can probably get more if its just dedicated to that as I'm running it inside of Linux as a desktop)
At the moment its the fastest GPU per watt of power used and its relatively cheap.
redsn0w
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778
Merit: 1041


#Free market


View Profile
August 09, 2014, 06:06:08 PM
 #352

Has anyone successfully compiled Wolfs cpuminer under centOS 6.4?
primer-
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000



View Profile
August 09, 2014, 06:22:10 PM
 #353

Has anyone successfully compiled Wolfs cpuminer under centOS 6.4?


Yes, remove MADV_HUGEPAGE from cpu-miner.c and it will compile
redsn0w
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1778
Merit: 1041


#Free market


View Profile
August 10, 2014, 07:40:31 AM
 #354

Has anyone successfully compiled Wolfs cpuminer under centOS 6.4?


Yes, remove MADV_HUGEPAGE from cpu-miner.c and it will compile

ok thanks for the reply ..Wink
Frangomel
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1021
Merit: 1000


FreshTheGame


View Profile WWW
August 11, 2014, 03:17:41 PM
Last edit: August 11, 2014, 03:30:28 PM by Frangomel
 #355

When I start CPU miner with i5-3350p have just only 75 h/s. I changed threads from 1 to 4, always same??? What is the problem???

edit: now have 120 h/s, hope it is ok now?

nioc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624
Merit: 1008


View Profile
August 12, 2014, 08:10:07 AM
 #356

When I start CPU miner with i5-3350p have just only 75 h/s. I changed threads from 1 to 4, always same??? What is the problem???

edit: now have 120 h/s, hope it is ok now?

I didn't try 1 or 4 threads but did try 2 and 3 threads with an i5-3450 with 3 threads being slightly faster.  Windows 7
Frangomel
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1021
Merit: 1000


FreshTheGame


View Profile WWW
August 13, 2014, 12:20:40 PM
 #357

have about 130 h/s with 3 threads, not so bad Smiley

tljenson
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 182
Merit: 100


View Profile
August 26, 2014, 08:16:21 AM
 #358

I new to mining, I want to make sure this is working ok. Here is what I get when I start mining.

[2014-08-26 02:13:39] thread 1: 500 hashes, 49.30 H/s
[2014-08-26 02:13:39] thread 0: 490 hashes, 48.25 H/s
[2014-08-26 02:13:39] thread 2: 476 hashes, 46.93 H/s
[2014-08-26 02:13:39] Stratum authentication failed
[2014-08-26 02:13:39] ...retry after 10 seconds

Do I have to worry that authentication failed? If so what am I doing wrong. The reason I asked is I tried several pools and got the same failed message. So I assume that is part of the mining, or is it>
nioc
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624
Merit: 1008


View Profile
August 26, 2014, 09:33:33 AM
 #359

I new to mining, I want to make sure this is working ok. Here is what I get when I start mining.

[2014-08-26 02:13:39] thread 1: 500 hashes, 49.30 H/s
[2014-08-26 02:13:39] thread 0: 490 hashes, 48.25 H/s
[2014-08-26 02:13:39] thread 2: 476 hashes, 46.93 H/s
[2014-08-26 02:13:39] Stratum authentication failed
[2014-08-26 02:13:39] ...retry after 10 seconds

Do I have to worry that authentication failed? If so what am I doing wrong. The reason I asked is I tried several pools and got the same failed message. So I assume that is part of the mining, or is it>

Yes worry because it's not working.  It's not the pool. 

Most likely there is a space in your wallet address when you copy and pasted it.  I think it happens because the address wraps to 2 lines in the wallet and it is not always obvious when you copy it especially if it is on 2 lines in the bat file.

Let me know what happens.
TimeHacker
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 520
Merit: 256



View Profile
August 26, 2014, 09:49:25 AM
 #360

I new to mining, I want to make sure this is working ok. Here is what I get when I start mining.

[2014-08-26 02:13:39] thread 1: 500 hashes, 49.30 H/s
[2014-08-26 02:13:39] thread 0: 490 hashes, 48.25 H/s
[2014-08-26 02:13:39] thread 2: 476 hashes, 46.93 H/s
[2014-08-26 02:13:39] Stratum authentication failed
[2014-08-26 02:13:39] ...retry after 10 seconds

Do I have to worry that authentication failed? If so what am I doing wrong. The reason I asked is I tried several pools and got the same failed message. So I assume that is part of the mining, or is it>

Which pool do you use? Everything works OK for me on Minergate for exmple...

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:  

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!