Claymore's CryptoNote AMD GPU Miner v11.3

[opossum]

- 510h/s - 280X Sams mem   (MSI Gaming)
- 490h/s - 7950 Hynix mem   (Gigabyte WF3)

And how is this possible?

- 510h/s - 280X Samsung Good memory!
- 490h/s - 7950 Hynix Good memory!
- 400h/s - 7950 Elpida bad memory...

I get only
- 460h/s - 280X Sams mem   (MSI Gaming)
- 400h/s - 7950 Hynix mem   (Gigabyte WF3)

[seljak]

@claymore
Minergate stratum is not working properly with yor miner.

I guess stratum is NOT working as it should.

Yes, Claymore's miner is not working properly with Minergate + stratum. Claymore will have to update it.

Any comment/update?

[Strannik-74]

I get only
- 460h/s - 280X Sams mem   (MSI Gaming)
- 400h/s - 7950 Hynix mem   (Gigabyte WF3)

Use: Win 8.1x64/Win 7x64 + 14.6 RC2 + Claymore CryptoNote GPU Miner v4.2 Beta - POOL 14-6 "-a 1"

[nrg_wolf]

I get only
- 460h/s - 280X Sams mem   (MSI Gaming)
- 400h/s - 7950 Hynix mem   (Gigabyte WF3)

Use: Win 8.1x64/Win 7x64 + 14.6 RC2 + Claymore CryptoNote GPU Miner v4.2 Beta - POOL 14-6 "-a 1"

Asus 280x hynix does 525h/s easy
MSI tf3 7950 hynix does 497.5 easy

[opossum]

Ok, I have 14.6 installed, will try 14.6 RC2.

[opossum]

Nothing changed, something else wrong?

[Strannik-74]

Nothing changed, something else wrong?

I do not know,take a look here?

[Claymore]

@claymore
Minergate stratum is not working properly with yor miner.

I guess stratum is NOT working as it should.

Yes, Claymore's miner is not working properly with Minergate + stratum. Claymore will have to update it.

Any comment/update?

I will check it right now.

[runra]

I get only
- 460h/s - 280X Sams mem   (MSI Gaming)
- 400h/s - 7950 Hynix mem   (Gigabyte WF3)

Use: Win 8.1x64/Win 7x64 + 14.6 RC2 + Claymore CryptoNote GPU Miner v4.2 Beta - POOL 14-6 "-a 1"

Asus 280x hynix does 525h/s easy
MSI tf3 7950 hynix does 497.5 easy

what is setting of your asus 280x ? 

i have asus 280x dc2t  can do about 480 h/s

[nrg_wolf]

I get only
- 460h/s - 280X Sams mem   (MSI Gaming)
- 400h/s - 7950 Hynix mem   (Gigabyte WF3)

Use: Win 8.1x64/Win 7x64 + 14.6 RC2 + Claymore CryptoNote GPU Miner v4.2 Beta - POOL 14-6 "-a 1"

Asus 280x hynix does 525h/s easy
MSI tf3 7950 hynix does 497.5 easy

what is setting of your asus 280x ? 

i have asus 280x dc2t  can do about 480 h/s

1165/1800 at 1.2v... been rock stable since i started mineing cn coins and that was when the first gpu miner came out lol.
cant say the same about my gb 280x's thou....

[dga]

You people who even hint at reverse-engineering claymore's stuff don't deserve to even have a computer to mine with.

You moral crusaders are more irritating than insects.

This is a question of ethicality and simply doing the right thing.  We haven't even addressed the morals of IP theft yet.

Selling your services to the xmr botnet owners and also receiving a stolen copy of dga's xmr miner source code to make your xmr miner work makes you nothing more than a hack/thief with zero ethics.  

You're a disgrace, both as a "dev" and as a member of the crypto community.  

First, I don't know what you've heard, but I NEVER got a stolen copy of dga's work. It was given to me by the very person he sold it to - to improve upon it. Not only did I do that, when I open sourced it, I credited him and even sent him BTC.

EDIT: It'd be nice if people told me these wild stories they hear so I can tell them what really happened.

Interesting how as soon as I set the record straight, he doesn't say shit. Not, "sorry I spread a rumor slandering you," or anything.

What?  I am not about to turn this thread into a debate on the ethicality of unauthorized open-sourcing. 

Dga did not authorize you to open-source any code from his xmr miner, period.  He sold it to someone else, not you.  He did not authorize his code ending up in your miner.

Now the record is straight.  Nothing else to say.

I can't speak for what the person I shared my code with did, but to my knowledge, they did not provide a copy of the source code to anyone with any intent that it be released publicly.  I certainly did not.  To my knowledge, there was an accidental leak of the code into the hands of a third party, and I don't know how it made its way into wolf's hands from there.  It's quite possible that the person who gave it to wolf said he'd bought it.  It's also possible that this is a lie - when I asked Wolf where he got the code, he said "oh, so it was yours" and refused to tell me how he'd gotten it.

*shrugs*  Beats me what really happened, of course;  I can only attest to my own side of it, and not that of anyone else, including the one (and only one) person I had shared the code with.  I'd love to know, but it's obviously only of historical interest at this point.

I'm delighted at this point to have it incorporated into the XMR source, because it makes block verification faster (and thus, sync), and that's good for everyone.

[ustcstone]

Can't running it in background without affecting the users,even with option "-li 1" 。It wound be nice if you can add a option like "-I" in sgminer

[dga]

Bullshit - I talked to dga. What's your beef with me, seriously? If you were just trolling, I doubt you would put this much effort into it.

It does surprise me that you're pissed I released it, though, as I didn't want to. Even more odd that dga is your hero, when he never released his, the guy he sold it to did.

I believe the latter statement ("the guy he sold it to ... released it") to be false, as I noted above.

The former is quite true that I never released it;  there are few heroes in this business.  I developed a fast, private miner for XMR and used for financial gain.  I didn't release it, and planned to keep it private until I'd made some money from it.  As some folks may know, I've been exploring a bunch of different models for how to get paid for developing miners and cryptocurrency code, ranging from:
  * Give it away and ask for donations (this doesn't work at all) -- scrypt for nvidia.
  * Bounties (protoshares gpu) -- this works ok, but doesn't really pay a living wage for the development time.
  * Developer fee (mandatory and then optional / open source after a week or two, for Riecoin) -- less than the bounty approach
  * Mine early to get some holdings and then try to help the coin by contributing code to it (Boolberry)
  * Mine privately for a month before giving it away (the most successful approach yet) (Monero)
    (I never got my month.  *grin*)

It's a debate worth having about how to fund ongoing development of good code, and it's clear from the response to Claymore's fee that there are very strong feelings about it on all sides.

yvg1900 may have the best model overall (a gentle dev fee in a closed source context), but I still think it's worth figuring out good paths that result in the development of quality open source software.

Good programmers are really expensive.

I think cbuchner1 actually has it right, though:  Future coin developers should partner with a miner developer or two to release their coins with fast CPU and GPU miners publicly available as open source.  It'll reduce (but not eliminate) all of this crap.  Perhaps fund it with a share of a 1% dev fee built into the coin itself, as Boolberry incorporated, so that the devs have an incentive to keep up the code.

[minspace]

Great job with this update Claymore!

i have Gigabyte 6970 and Powercolor 280x in the same rig

v3.4 13.12 driver gave me 600 H/s , v4, v4.1, v4.2 even less

and v5 750H/s

best for me so far

i still didn't try v5 with 14.6 driver? should i ?

THX

[svetliopi44]

I am sure that there is always faster than a miner who is released.
Logically's
There is no way to sell so hey ​​hen that lays golden eggs.
I saw it and x-11 x-13 and so on

[dga]

Bullshit - I talked to dga. What's your beef with me, seriously? If you were just trolling, I doubt you would put this much effort into it.

It does surprise me that you're pissed I released it, though, as I didn't want to. Even more odd that dga is your hero, when he never released his, the guy he sold it to did.

I believe the latter statement ("the guy he sold it to ... released it") to be false, as I noted above.

The former is quite true that I never released it;  there are few heroes in this business.  I developed a fast, private miner for XMR and used for financial gain.  I didn't release it, and planned to keep it private until I'd made some money from it.  As some folks may know, I've been exploring a bunch of different models for how to get paid for developing miners and cryptocurrency code, ranging from:
  * Give it away and ask for donations (this doesn't work at all) -- scrypt for nvidia.
  * Bounties (protoshares gpu) -- this works ok, but doesn't really pay a living wage for the development time.
  * Developer fee (mandatory and then optional / open source after a week or two, for Riecoin) -- less than the bounty approach
  * Mine early to get some holdings and then try to help the coin by contributing code to it (Boolberry)
  * Mine privately for a month before giving it away (the most successful approach yet) (Monero)
    (I never got my month.  *grin*)

It's a debate worth having about how to fund ongoing development of good code, and it's clear from the response to Claymore's fee that there are very strong feelings about it on all sides.

yvg1900 may have the best model overall (a gentle dev fee in a closed source context), but I still think it's worth figuring out good paths that result in the development of quality open source software.

Good programmers are really expensive.

I think cbuchner1 actually has it right, though:  Future coin developers should partner with a miner developer or two to release their coins with fast CPU and GPU miners publicly available as open source.  It'll reduce (but not eliminate) all of this crap.  Perhaps fund it with a share of a 1% dev fee built into the coin itself, as Boolberry incorporated, so that the devs have an incentive to keep up the code.

I didn't want to release it. Remember the guy? Well, that psychopath said he was going to release it without crediting either of us. He also said you worked for him - but nothing he says can be trusted, I suppose.

I have no idea who you're talking about, actually.  As I said - I don't know the path my code took on its way to get to you.  If you want to PM me with who gave it to you, I'll hold it in confidence;  I'm kind of curious, but not in an important way.

[followtheboss]

Can't running it in background without affecting the users,even with option "-li 1" 。It wound be nice if you can add a option like "-I" in sgminer

+1

An -I option that change usage of GPU mining that would be great can you add it please ??

Cheers

[Strannik-74]

Speed: 1885 h/s, TotalHashes: 73950K, DevHashes: 3696K Mining time: 10:53
07/14/14-06:14:39 - SHARE FOUND (target 16000) - (GPU 3 of 4)
07/14/14-06:14:40 - SHARE FOUND (target 16000) - (GPU 0 of 4)
07/14/14-06:14:42 - SHARE FOUND (target 16000) - (GPU 3 of 4)
07/14/14-06:14:58 - SHARE FOUND (target 16000) - (GPU 3 of 4)
07/14/14-06:15:01 - New job received from xxx.xxx.xxx:xxxx
Speed: 1885 h/s, TotalHashes: 73998K, DevHashes: 3699K Mining time: 10:54 -- 4x270X Sapphire Dual X, Hynix mem, 1175/1500/1093mV - Win 8.1, 14.6 rc2, Claymore v 4.2
07/14/14-06:15:06 - SHARE FOUND (target 32000) - (GPU 0 of 4)
07/14/14-06:15:08 - SHARE FOUND (target 32000) - (GPU 3 of 4)
07/14/14-06:15:09 - SHARE FOUND (target 32000) - (GPU 2 of 4)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Speed: 1712 h/s, TotalHashes: 104382K, DevHashes: 5218K Mining time: 16:56
07/14/14-08:18:13 - SHARE FOUND (target 100001) - (GPU 3 of 5)
DevFee: 07/14/14-08:18:22 - SHARE FOUND (target 9843) - (GPU 2 of 5)
DevFee: 07/14/14-08:19:15 - SHARE FOUND (target 6932) - (GPU 1 of 5)
DevFee: 07/14/14-08:19:37 - SHARE FOUND (target 13331) - (GPU 0 of 5)
07/14/14-08:19:38 - SHARE FOUND (target 100001) - (GPU 3 of 5)
07/14/14-08:19:43 - SHARE FOUND (target 100001) - (GPU 4 of 5)
07/14/14-08:19:54 - New job received from xxx.xxx.xxx:xxxx
Speed: 1712 h/s, TotalHashes: 104640K, DevHashes: 5231K Mining time: 16:58 -- -- 5x270X Gigabyte, Elpida mem, 1175/1500/1093mV - Win 8.1, 14.6 rc2, Claymore v 4.2
07/14/14-08:20:38 - SHARE FOUND (target 100001) - (GPU 1 of 5)
07/14/14-08:20:54 - SHARE FOUND (target 100001) - (GPU 3 of 5)
07/14/14-08:20:56 - SHARE FOUND (target 100001) - (GPU 2 of 5)

- 510h/s - 280X Sams mem   (MSI Gaming)
- 490h/s - 7950 Hynix mem   (Gigabyte WF3)
- 400h/s - 7950 Elpida mem  (Sapphire DUAL-X/VAPOR-X/ASUS DCIIT)
- 471h/s - 270X Hynix mem   (Sapphire DUAL-X OC)
- 340h/s - 270X Elpida mem  (Powercolor Turbo-DUO/Gigabyte WF3)

Why Hynix gives 40% more?

[Starlightbreaker]

Speed: 1885 h/s, TotalHashes: 73950K, DevHashes: 3696K Mining time: 10:53
07/14/14-06:14:39 - SHARE FOUND (target 16000) - (GPU 3 of 4)
07/14/14-06:14:40 - SHARE FOUND (target 16000) - (GPU 0 of 4)
07/14/14-06:14:42 - SHARE FOUND (target 16000) - (GPU 3 of 4)
07/14/14-06:14:58 - SHARE FOUND (target 16000) - (GPU 3 of 4)
07/14/14-06:15:01 - New job received from xxx.xxx.xxx:xxxx
Speed: 1885 h/s, TotalHashes: 73998K, DevHashes: 3699K Mining time: 10:54 -- 4x270X Sapphire Dual X, Hynix mem, 1175/1500/1093mV - Win 8.1, 14.6 rc2, Claymore v 4.2
07/14/14-06:15:06 - SHARE FOUND (target 32000) - (GPU 0 of 4)
07/14/14-06:15:08 - SHARE FOUND (target 32000) - (GPU 3 of 4)
07/14/14-06:15:09 - SHARE FOUND (target 32000) - (GPU 2 of 4)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Speed: 1712 h/s, TotalHashes: 104382K, DevHashes: 5218K Mining time: 16:56
07/14/14-08:18:13 - SHARE FOUND (target 100001) - (GPU 3 of 5)
DevFee: 07/14/14-08:18:22 - SHARE FOUND (target 9843) - (GPU 2 of 5)
DevFee: 07/14/14-08:19:15 - SHARE FOUND (target 6932) - (GPU 1 of 5)
DevFee: 07/14/14-08:19:37 - SHARE FOUND (target 13331) - (GPU 0 of 5)
07/14/14-08:19:38 - SHARE FOUND (target 100001) - (GPU 3 of 5)
07/14/14-08:19:43 - SHARE FOUND (target 100001) - (GPU 4 of 5)
07/14/14-08:19:54 - New job received from xxx.xxx.xxx:xxxx
Speed: 1712 h/s, TotalHashes: 104640K, DevHashes: 5231K Mining time: 16:58 -- -- 5x270X Gigabyte, Elpida mem, 1175/1500/1093mV - Win 8.1, 14.6 rc2, Claymore v 4.2
07/14/14-08:20:38 - SHARE FOUND (target 100001) - (GPU 1 of 5)
07/14/14-08:20:54 - SHARE FOUND (target 100001) - (GPU 3 of 5)
07/14/14-08:20:56 - SHARE FOUND (target 100001) - (GPU 2 of 5)

- 510h/s - 280X Sams mem   (MSI Gaming)
- 490h/s - 7950 Hynix mem   (Gigabyte WF3)
- 400h/s - 7950 Elpida mem  (Sapphire DUAL-X/VAPOR-X/ASUS DCIIT)
- 471h/s - 270X Hynix mem   (Sapphire DUAL-X OC)
- 340h/s - 270X Elpida mem  (Powercolor Turbo-DUO/Gigabyte WF3)

Why Hynix gives 40% more?

It's long been known that Elpida sucks for mining - it was first shown with the 290 and 290X cards when mining LTC. I believe it has something to do with the timings.

Even stilt's custom bios doesn't help with cryptonote.

it helps to a certain degree on scrypt.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               

[xaitienle]

If we compare Monero mining to X11 mining , which one requires more energy?
For example my rig takes 1200W when mining scrypt 1500 W when mining X11 900W Im using 5 r290

X11 is slighlty better at conserving energy compared to cryptonight (monero).  iirc... X11 is about 55% of scrypt energy consumption while cryptonight is about 40%.  Although... "optimizations" have frequenlty meant better hashes at detriment of power consumption.

edit: right now... it's hard to mine x11 for better profit than cryptonight... but that's always changing.

I total don't agree with you. At my wall comparision, CN take around 85% of Scrypt power consumption