Nexus - Pure SHA3 + CPU/GPU + nPoS + 15 Active Innovations + More to Come

[hero18688]

Dev,do you have any plan on PoD? You need more trust with ppl on such a great project.

[Superxfast]

Hello Vi,

Could you please help to tell the different from: "prime difficulty" : 6.07757780,
    and "hash  difficulty" : 6.56321150,

in the getinf output strings.

Rgrds,

[SnjafSnjaf]

Dev,do you have any plan on PoD? You need more trust with ppl on such a great project.

POD doesn't mean anything, wake up you bunch of idiots! In last few months there was over 30 coins with POD which were HUGE SCAMS.
If you can't conclude after months of their development and support of this coin that they are real deal then you should just give up, cash out your btc's and never come back to crypto.

[hoze]

Is there some limitation in skminer for 4 GPU ??
my bat file: skminer.exe 127.0.0.1 9325 6 20 but only GPU 1,2,3 & 6 work. GPU No 4 and 5 not work. Speed is ~68Mhs for 4 GPU. My GPUs are MSI 750ti 2GB. Tested with other coins and there is no problem .

[cbuchner1]

Djm you are working on miner?

He's trying to get the OpenCL miner to be competitive.

[KryptoKash]

Dev,do you have any plan on PoD? You need more trust with ppl on such a great project.

POD doesn't mean anything, wake up you bunch of idiots! In last few months there was over 30 coins with POD which were HUGE SCAMS.
If you can't conclude after months of their development and support of this coin that they are real deal then you should just give up, cash out your btc's and never come back to crypto.

If all the hard work we have put into CoinShield, and no premine... still leaves doubt about us I'm confident POD won't help. Our focus is building this coin, not spending valuable time on building "trust" by getting POD. When I see coins who have a heavy premine, with names like DarkBlackPeerBitcoin (just an example of course prob. not a real coin...yet) which took 3-6 hours to clone/create and then get a POD for the sake of building "trust" it makes me questioned why anyone would consider this a tool for building trust.

When I see all the coins listed: http://cryptoasian.com/coin-list ... I am glad that CoinShield is not on that list.

However as with everything...If enough people agree that a POD is the best tool for creating trust then I will discuss it with Viz. Until that time we will continue to work on the development of CoinShield.

On another note, I am very happy to see the community helping out so much. This provides Viz more time to code and work on the core. Pools Source will be released very soon.    

Cheers,
KryptoKash

[mumus]

Hi Viz and the dev team.
Could you please let us know the exact formula how to calculate the difficulty of the GPU channel from the block target? I would like to use it on the miner.  I can calculate a constant back based on the difficulty and target of an existing block but I guess there is a better way.
Also I've noticed that the difficulties we can see in the wallet debug window (and with the RPC commands) are the difficulty of the last fond block. For me it would be more logical to see the difficulty of the current block the miners are trying to solve and not the one before.
As a side note, in one of my previous posts https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=657601.msg9319604#msg9319604 I've also suggested to use the difficulty of the block 0 as a base difficulty 1 and calculate the difficulty of every block based on this, similar to bitcoin.

[Videlicet]

Supertxfast,

Each number corresponds to the Difficulty of Each Mining Channel, The Prime Channel [CPU] and the Hashing Channel [GPU].


----------------------------------


mumus [here is some code]

Code:

	/** Determines the Decimal of nBits per Channel for a decent "Frame of Reference".
		Has no functionality in Network Operation. **/
	double GetDifficulty(unsigned int nBits, int nChannel)
	{
		if(nChannel == 1)
			return nBits / 10000000.0;
			
		double dDiff =
			(double)0x0000ffff / (double)(nBits & 0x00ffffff);

		int nShift = nBits >> 24;
		while(nShift > 124)
		{
			dDiff = dDiff / 256.0;
			nShift--;
		}
		
		while(nShift < 124)
		{
			dDiff = dDiff * 256.0;
			nShift++;
		}
		
		return dDiff * 64;
	}

	unsigned int ShieldTargetGPU(const CBlockIndex* pindex, bool output)
	{
		const CBlockIndex* pindexFirst = GetLastChannelIndex(pindex, 2);
		if (pindexFirst->pprev == NULL)
			return bnProofOfWorkStart[2].GetCompact();
			
		const CBlockIndex* pindexLast = GetLastChannelIndex(pindexFirst->pprev, 2);
		if (pindexLast->pprev == NULL)
			return bnProofOfWorkStart[2].GetCompact();

			
		int64 nBlockTime = max(pindexFirst->GetBlockTime() - pindexLast->GetBlockTime(), (int64) 1);
		int64 nBlockTarget = nTargetTimespan;
		
		
		double nChainMod = GetFractionalSubsidy(GetChainAge(pindexFirst->GetBlockTime()), 0, 20.0) / (pindexFirst->nReleasedReserve[0] + 1);
		nChainMod = min(nChainMod, 1.0);
		nChainMod = max(nChainMod, (pindex->nVersion == 1) ? 0.75 : 0.5);
		
		
		/** Enforce Block Version 2 Rule. Chain mod changes block time requirements, not actual mod after block times. **/
		if(pindex->nVersion >= 2)
			nBlockTarget *= nChainMod;
		
		
		double nBlockMod = (double) nBlockTarget / nBlockTime; 
		nBlockMod = min(nBlockMod, 1.125);
		nBlockMod = max(nBlockMod, 0.75);
		
		
		int64 nUpperBound = nBlockTarget;
		int64 nLowerBound = nBlockTarget * nBlockMod;
		
		if(pindex->nVersion == 1)
			nLowerBound *= nChainMod;
		
		///set maximum [difficulty] up to 8%, and minimum [difficulty] down to 75%
		nLowerBound = min(nLowerBound, (int64)(nUpperBound + (nUpperBound / 8)));
		nLowerBound = max(nLowerBound, (3 * nUpperBound ) / 4);
			
		CBigNum bnNew;
		bnNew.SetCompact(pindexFirst->nBits);
		
		bnNew *= nUpperBound;
		bnNew /= nLowerBound;
		
		if (bnNew > bnProofOfWorkLimit[2])
			bnNew = bnProofOfWorkLimit[2];
			
		if(output)
		{
			int64 nDays, nHours, nMinutes;
			GetChainTimes(GetChainAge(pindexFirst->GetBlockTime()), nDays, nHours, nMinutes);
			
			printf("RETARGET[GPU] time=%I64d [%f %%]\n\tchain time: [%I64d / %I64d]\n\treleased reward: %I64d [%f %%]\n\tdifficulty: [%f to %f]\n\tGPU height: %I64d [AGE %I64d days, %I64d hours, %I64d minutes]\n\n", 
			nBlockTime, (100.0 * ((double)nLowerBound / nUpperBound)), nBlockTarget, nBlockTime, pindexFirst->nReleasedReserve[0] / COIN, 100.0 * nChainMod, GetDifficulty(pindexFirst->nBits, 2), GetDifficulty(bnNew.GetCompact(), 2), pindexFirst->nChannelHeight, nDays, nHours, nMinutes);
		}
		
		return bnNew.GetCompact();
	}

Since the nBits is a Compact Representation of an uint1024, the calculation had to be modified to fit the circumstances. I'll post your suggestions in the Next Update, for the Difficulty of the Current Block being displayed in Debug Console.

Thank You,
Viz.

[cbuchner1]

Hi fellas

I find that the sieve in the Supercomputing miner may be a bit more efficient when you increase the number of offsets going into the sieve. In 3 hours my three GPUs found 9 blocks, which is about 50% more efficient than before.

[...content deleted...]

EDIT: Meh, after a run time of 12 hours I think I can say it must have been a fluke. The first few blocks arrived faster purely by chance.

[hero18688]

The algo of CPU Channel is the same as XPM?

[Videlicet]

The algo of CPU Channel is the same as XPM?

No it is finding Dense Prime Clusters separated by a maximum gap of +12. XPM is finding Cunningham Chains and Bi-Twin Chains, they are completely different Prime Number Patterns.

Code:

	/** Determines the difficulty of the Given Prime Number.
		Difficulty is represented as so V.X
		V is the whole number, or Cluster Size, X is a proportion
		of Fermat Remainder from last Composite Number [0 - 1] **/
	double GetPrimeDifficulty(CBigNum prime, int checks)
	{
		if(!PrimeCheck(prime, checks))
			return 0.0; ///difficulty of a composite number
			
		CBigNum lastPrime = prime;
		CBigNum next = prime + 2;
		unsigned int clusterSize = 1;
		
		///largest prime gap in cluster can be + 12
		///this was determined by previously found clusters up to 17 primes
		for( next ; next <= lastPrime + 12; next += 2)
		{
			if(PrimeCheck(next, checks))
			{
				lastPrime = next;
				++clusterSize;
			}
		}
		
		///calulate the rarety of cluster from proportion of fermat remainder of last prime + 2
		///keep fractional remainder in bounds of [0, 1]
		double fractionalRemainder = 1000000.0 / GetFractionalDifficulty(next);
		if(fractionalRemainder > 1.0 || fractionalRemainder < 0.0)
			fractionalRemainder = 0.0;
		
		return (clusterSize + fractionalRemainder);
	}

Thank You,
Viz.

[cbuchner1]

The algo of CPU Channel is the same as XPM?

No it is finding Dense Prime Clusters separated by a maximum gap of +12. XPM is finding Cunningham Chains and Bi-Twin Chains, they are completely different Prime Number Patterns.

Code:

	/** Determines the difficulty of the Given Prime Number.
		Difficulty is represented as so V.X
		V is the whole number, or Cluster Size, X is a proportion
		of Fermat Remainder from last Composite Number [0 - 1] **/
	double GetPrimeDifficulty(CBigNum prime, int checks)
	{
		if(!PrimeCheck(prime, checks))
			return 0.0; ///difficulty of a composite number
			
		CBigNum lastPrime = prime;
		CBigNum next = prime + 2;
		unsigned int clusterSize = 1;
		
		///largest prime gap in cluster can be + 12
		///this was determined by previously found clusters up to 17 primes
		for( next ; next <= lastPrime + 12; next += 2)
		{
			if(PrimeCheck(next, checks))
			{
				lastPrime = next;
				++clusterSize;
			}
		}
		
		///calulate the rarety of cluster from proportion of fermat remainder of last prime + 2
		///keep fractional remainder in bounds of [0, 1]
		double fractionalRemainder = 1000000.0 / GetFractionalDifficulty(next);
		if(fractionalRemainder > 1.0 || fractionalRemainder < 0.0)
			fractionalRemainder = 0.0;
		
		return (clusterSize + fractionalRemainder);
	}

Thank You,
Viz.

Bug report

the comment says ///calulate the rarety of cluster from proportion of fermat remainder of last prime + 2

yet you're taking the proportion of the fermat remainder of the last number tested +2 before leaving
this loop when the distance exceeds 12.

This is significant because the last number tested is clearly not a prime (because it would be
part of the chain otherwise), and after adding 2 there is a chance that this one *is* a prime,
having a fermat remainder of exactly 1.

I think this is one of the reasons some found constellations get assigned a difficulty of 4.000000, 5.00000,
6.000000 etc. which somewhat reduces the chance of submitting a share for found constellations.

Unfortunately fixing this would require a hardfork.

Christian

[mumus]

Hi fellas

I find that the sieve in the Supercomputing miner may be a bit more efficient when you increase the number of offsets going into the sieve. In 3 hours my three GPUs found 9 blocks, which is about 50% more efficient than before.

[...content deleted...]

EDIT: Meh, after a run time of 12 hours I think I can say it must have been a fluke. The first few blocks arrived faster purely by chance.

I've also played with these parameters and had similar experience. Sometime I get an influx of blocks and then nothing, and I can't decide which configuration is good or not. In any case I'm almost sure that  keeping the sieve on 6 even if the difficulty goes down to 5.8+ is still better.

[Videlicet]

Code:

	/** Breaks the remainder of last composite in Prime Cluster into an integer. 
		Larger numbers are more rare to find, so a proportion can be determined 
		to give decimal difficulty between whole number increases. **/
	unsigned int GetFractionalDifficulty(CBigNum composite)
	{
		/** Break the remainder of Fermat test to calculate fractional difficulty [Thanks Sunny] **/
		return ((composite - FermatTest(composite, 2) << 24) / composite).getuint();
	}

The fractional Remainder is more than just a Fermat Test. The result is 0.000 in rare cases the proportion is larger than 1.0; this may be the cases you are saying where +2 is prime.

Code:

		double fractionalRemainder = 1000000.0 / GetFractionalDifficulty(next);
		if(fractionalRemainder > 1.0 || fractionalRemainder < 0.0)
			fractionalRemainder = 0.0;

Viz.

[djm34]

Djm you are working on miner?

He's trying to get the OpenCL miner to be competitive.

at last it works....
Current speed over my R9-290x 45MH/s (then the temp increase to 94°C and it down clock... getting fed up of this card... but I think it is rather a problem with my card...). The funny thing is that changing the driver from 14.7 to 14.9 increased the speed by around 10MH/s
So I would encourage amd user moving to that version (you want to keep using your old crappy driver: you're on your own... for some reason amd users, always ask for things like that: I still use windows xp, and the new drivers don't work with windows XP...   time to upgrade  and enjoy boiling eggs with your cards !!!)

I think some of the perf issue could have been due to printf inside the kernel during testing (however I can't prove it and won't test the old kernel either... as it isn't my problem  ) even within conditional statement, it decreases the speed down to 35kH/s)

I will release soon the source and windows exe after I am done with cleaning and removing some hard-coded crap in the code... (which is kind of funny when a full config file is inputed to a program...)

they won't be any support for linux as I can't test it (and none was included in the files I got...  ) but it should be straightforward.

Main issue: cpu usage which is rather high (same problem with the nvidia version actually...)

[SnjafSnjaf]

Djm you are working on miner?

He's trying to get the OpenCL miner to be competitive.

at last it works....
Current speed over my R9-290x 45MH/s (then the temp increase to 94°C and it down clock... getting fed up of this card... but I think it is rather a problem with my card...). The funny thing is that changing the driver from 14.7 to 14.9 increased the speed by around 10MH/s
So I would encourage amd user moving to that version (you want to keep using your old crappy driver: you're on your own... for some reason amd users, always ask for things like that: I still use windows xp, and the new drivers don't work with windows XP...   time to upgrade  and enjoy boiling eggs with your cards !!!)

I think some of the perf issue could have been due to printf inside the kernel during testing (however I can't prove it and won't test the old kernel either... as it isn't my problem  ) even within conditional statement, it decreases the speed down to 35kH/s)

I will release soon the source and windows exe after I am done with cleaning and removing some hard-coded crap in the code... (which is kind of funny when a full config file is inputed to a program...)

they won't be any support for linux as I can't test it (and none was included in the files I got...  ) but it should be straightforward.

Main issue: cpu usage which is rather high (same problem with the nvidia version actually...)

I asked are you working on it because if you do i knew that you will make it. If someone can do it, it is you! Good job!

[djm34]

ok here the first version of the miner: (source+binaries) http://ge.tt/7Z2nZ132/v/0?c

I haven't made a github repo yet.
It was compiled with vs2013.
the source is in "Miner", the binaries in "Release" (from the root, there is another Release directory in "Miner" but you won't find anything).
There is a bat example called "test_750ti.bat" (because I am lazy...).
A config file can be found (and must be set to match your card) in Resources/Config
It is a standard sgminer miner config file.
The kernel is in Kernel directory and should remain there.

Currently in the config file, this is my best setting for the my 290x with 14.9 drivers
And leads to 53MH/s before the card throttle down because of high temp.
With power at -30% (where the temp is stable I still get 45~48MH/s)
powertune does not seem to work (actually it does not work either in msi AB, I have been able to set it only from catalyst app).

Right now, it is a one kernel implementation, 2 kernels might improve the hashrate. (got many exception error when trying to implement it, then I settled down to 1 kernel...)

It was tested on testnet, I haven't had the patience to wait for a block on main net (I know that someone with a big farm is running on coinshield... so I didn't insist...  but it should work)

donation address: 2S2pCpRXyb8Lpre52U3Xjq2MguSdaea5YGjVTsJqgZBfL2S24ag

[cestballot]

ok here the first version of the miner: (source+binaries) http://ge.tt/7Z2nZ132/v/0?c

I haven't made a github repo yet.
It was compiled with vs2013.
the source is in "Miner", the binaries in "Release" (from the root, there is another Release directory in "Miner" but you won't find anything).
There is a bat example called "test_750ti.bat" (because I am lazy...).
A config file can be found (and must be set to match your card) in Resources/Config
It is a standard sgminer miner config file.
The kernel is in Kernel directory and should remain there.

Currently in the config file, this is my best setting for the my 290x with 14.9 drivers
And leads to 53MH/s before the card throttle down because of high temp.
With power at -30% (where the temp is stable I still get 45~48MH/s)
powertune does not seem to work (actually it does not work either in msi AB, I have been able to set it only from catalyst app).

Right now, it is a one kernel implementation, 2 kernels might improve the hashrate. (got many exception error when trying to implement it, then I settled down to 1 kernel...)

It was tested on testnet, I haven't had the patience to wait for a block on main net (I know that someone with a big farm is running on coinshield... so I didn't insist...  but it should work)

donation address: 2S2pCpRXyb8Lpre52U3Xjq2MguSdaea5YGjVTsJqgZBfL2S24ag

Thx a lot

Best regards

[hoze]

ok here the first version of the miner: (source+binaries) http://ge.tt/7Z2nZ132/v/0?c

I haven't made a github repo yet.
It was compiled with vs2013.
the source is in "Miner", the binaries in "Release" (from the root, there is another Release directory in "Miner" but you won't find anything).
There is a bat example called "test_750ti.bat" (because I am lazy...).
A config file can be found (and must be set to match your card) in Resources/Config
It is a standard sgminer miner config file.
The kernel is in Kernel directory and should remain there.

Currently in the config file, this is my best setting for the my 290x with 14.9 drivers
And leads to 53MH/s before the card throttle down because of high temp.
With power at -30% (where the temp is stable I still get 45~48MH/s)
powertune does not seem to work (actually it does not work either in msi AB, I have been able to set it only from catalyst app).

Right now, it is a one kernel implementation, 2 kernels might improve the hashrate. (got many exception error when trying to implement it, then I settled down to 1 kernel...)

It was tested on testnet, I haven't had the patience to wait for a block on main net (I know that someone with a big farm is running on coinshield... so I didn't insist...  but it should work)

donation address: 2S2pCpRXyb8Lpre52U3Xjq2MguSdaea5YGjVTsJqgZBfL2S24ag

Great! Thx

[hoze]

ok here the first version of the miner: (source+binaries) http://ge.tt/7Z2nZ132/v/0?c

I haven't made a github repo yet.
It was compiled with vs2013.
the source is in "Miner", the binaries in "Release" (from the root, there is another Release directory in "Miner" but you won't find anything).
There is a bat example called "test_750ti.bat" (because I am lazy...).
A config file can be found (and must be set to match your card) in Resources/Config
It is a standard sgminer miner config file.
The kernel is in Kernel directory and should remain there.

Currently in the config file, this is my best setting for the my 290x with 14.9 drivers
And leads to 53MH/s before the card throttle down because of high temp.
With power at -30% (where the temp is stable I still get 45~48MH/s)
powertune does not seem to work (actually it does not work either in msi AB, I have been able to set it only from catalyst app).

Right now, it is a one kernel implementation, 2 kernels might improve the hashrate. (got many exception error when trying to implement it, then I settled down to 1 kernel...)

It was tested on testnet, I haven't had the patience to wait for a block on main net (I know that someone with a big farm is running on coinshield... so I didn't insist...  but it should work)

donation address: 2S2pCpRXyb8Lpre52U3Xjq2MguSdaea5YGjVTsJqgZBfL2S24ag

Great! Thx

I got error when run the bat file: First problem was the "msvcp120.dll" is missing. After installing dll "the application was unable to start correctly 0xc00007b"

My system is Win 7 64bit , AMD MSI 280x .... Any help ?