alicea
|
|
July 03, 2014, 05:31:15 PM Last edit: July 03, 2014, 06:51:05 PM by alicea |
|
It's great that there's a pool! How to set difficulty-multiplier properly? Or it should always be 256? What does this parameter mean?
|
|
|
|
jox
|
|
July 03, 2014, 07:51:39 PM |
|
It's great that there's a pool! How to set difficulty-multiplier properly? Or it should always be 256? What does this parameter mean?
You can set it like this: sgminer -k qubitcoin -o stratum+tcp://deep.suprnova.cc:3222 -u Weblogin.WorkerName -p WorkerPassword -w 128 --difficulty-multiplier 256 from https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=475795.0;allA new option was added: --difficulty-multiplier. It allows to set stratum difficulty multiplier. For QubitCoin, Quark and Animecoin it will be usually 256. For Groestlcoin, Fuguecoin and Twecoin it will be usually 0.0039062500 (1/256). Default value is 1.0. If you have "share above target" errors then set it to 256. If difficulty required by pool is strangely large, set it to 0.0039062500 (1/256). Other values are unlikely to be used. Hopefully this will fix all remaining stratum problems. and for the end, you just find block #9701 on suprnova
|
|
|
|
marada
|
|
July 03, 2014, 08:28:57 PM Last edit: July 03, 2014, 08:40:43 PM by marada |
|
Now have some questions to the DEVs team. How is the development of the website? Could you provide a forum?
The coin is technically very suitable for some purposes and it soon may become a rising star. We need a place to create a community.
|
|
|
|
alicea
|
|
July 03, 2014, 09:12:40 PM |
|
It's great that there's a pool! How to set difficulty-multiplier properly? Or it should always be 256? What does this parameter mean?
A new option was added: --difficulty-multiplier. It allows to set stratum difficulty multiplier. For QubitCoin, Quark and Animecoin it will be usually 256. For Groestlcoin, Fuguecoin and Twecoin it will be usually 0.0039062500 (1/256). Default value is 1.0. If you have "share above target" errors then set it to 256. If difficulty required by pool is strangely large, set it to 0.0039062500 (1/256). Other values are unlikely to be used. Hopefully this will fix all remaining stratum problems. Thank you very much for this info!!!! and for the end, you just find block #9701 on suprnova
|
|
|
|
Markos
Member
Offline
Activity: 108
Merit: 10
|
|
July 03, 2014, 09:42:35 PM |
|
My R9 280X Vapor-X + 3 x R9 290 Tri-X, which are running on Mint 13 have a low hash rate compared to R9 280X Vapor-X on Windows. Catalysts (14.6 beta) and frequencies on R9 280X (1080/1550) are the same Mint 13: R9 280X Vapor-X - 4.5 Mhash with -I 19 and -g 2 R9 290 Tri-X @ 1000/1250 - 5.2-5.3 Mhash with -I 20 and -g 2 Windows: R9 280X Vapor-X - 5.05 Mhash with -I 19 and -g 2
|
|
|
|
marada
|
|
July 03, 2014, 09:54:56 PM |
|
My R9 280X Vapor-X + 3 x R9 290 Tri-X, which are running on Mint 13 have a low hash rate compared to R9 280X Vapor-X on Windows. Catalysts (14.6 beta) and frequencies on R9 280X (1080/1550) are the same Mint 13: R9 280X Vapor-X - 4.5 Mhash with -I 19 and -g 2 R9 290 Tri-X @ 1000/1250 - 5.2-5.3 Mhash with -I 20 and -g 2 Windows: R9 280X Vapor-X - 5.05 Mhash with -I 19 and -g 2 I think there are different optimal settings as I have noticed with the other algos. The same version of fglrx doesn't necessary have to be the same under linux and windows. Try i.e. -g 1, try out setting I, tc or xintensity.
|
|
|
|
Markos
Member
Offline
Activity: 108
Merit: 10
|
|
July 03, 2014, 10:02:46 PM |
|
-g 1 is not optimal, 200-300 Khash lower than -g 2 TC/xintensity is set to auto... What hash rates you have on other cards? I'm curious if hardware comparision for qubit algorithm exists.
|
|
|
|
th00ber
|
|
July 03, 2014, 10:04:47 PM |
|
4Mh/s with a 750ti, The maxwell is doing well compare to a 280x
|
|
|
|
marada
|
|
July 03, 2014, 10:19:23 PM |
|
My hardware performance:
Radeon 7950 Sapphire dual-xcore: 1100, memory: 1250, -g 1 -I 18 4,4 Mh/s Radeon 7950 Sapphire dual-x core: 1200, memory: 1500, -g 1, -I 18 4,6 Mh/s Radeon 7950 Gigabyte core: 1100, memory: 1400, -g 1, -I 18 4,5 Mh/s Radeon R9 270 Gigabyte core: 1100, memory: 1100, -g 2, -I 15 2,9 Mh/s Radeon 7790 Asus core: 1200, memory: 1200, -g 1, -I 16 2,2 Mh/s Radeon 5570 Sapphire core: 880, memory: 800, -g 1, -I 16 0,5 Mh/s
The 7790 performance is surprisingly high. The card is very cool and takes about 85W.
|
|
|
|
Markos
Member
Offline
Activity: 108
Merit: 10
|
|
July 03, 2014, 10:30:24 PM |
|
Oh, but I think that 7950 has the best profitability. About 170-200W power consumption, 2.5x better performance and in comparison to 750Ti more versatile for other algorithms
|
|
|
|
marada
|
|
July 03, 2014, 10:37:32 PM |
|
750Ti is a low wattage card. Only about 60W. Does it mean NVIDIA outperforms radeon in this algo?
|
|
|
|
Markos
Member
Offline
Activity: 108
Merit: 10
|
|
July 03, 2014, 10:41:26 PM |
|
Probably yes, but versatility is what I like the most. Especially when you have cheap or free electricity
|
|
|
|
ajeef
|
|
July 03, 2014, 11:03:49 PM |
|
750Ti is a low wattage card. Only about 60W. Does it mean NVIDIA outperforms radeon in this algo?
750ti=270 many algo only 60W. But I think that AMD can also more optimized
|
|
|
|
marada
|
|
July 03, 2014, 11:15:14 PM Last edit: July 03, 2014, 11:58:57 PM by marada |
|
I hope someone optimize this algo for AMD better. It seems to be the future of GPU mining. X11/X13 is already overtaken by FPGA unfortunately. Is see the diff at DRK and some other coins rising to the level GPU mining became unprofitable. Scrypt-n, due to it's extremely memory intensive design, makes cards hot and draws a lot of electricity. Qubitcoin algo uses the memory in the way it is hard to make ASIC or FPGA, but is more eco friendly at the other hand.* edit: appeared to be more my wish than true
|
|
|
|
kahir
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 03, 2014, 11:17:40 PM |
|
i have 1x 7790 and 1x 260x ..... both give same hash power around 2 M/HASH or 2.1 M/HASH
my setting
GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PERCENT=100 sgminer.exe -k qubitcoin -o stratum+tcp://deep.suprnova.cc:3222 -u x -p x -I 16 -g 2 -w 64 --difficulty-multiplier 256
|
|
|
|
kahir
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1000
|
|
July 03, 2014, 11:18:32 PM |
|
I hope someone optimize this algo for AMD better. It seems to be the future of GPU mining. X11/X13 is already overtaken by FPGA unfortunately. Is see the diff at DRK and some other coins rising to the level GPU mining became unprofitable. Scrypt-n, due to it's extremely memory intensive design, makes cards hot and draws a lot of electricity. Qubitcoin algo uses the memory in the way it is hard to make ASIC or FPGA, but is more eco friendly at the other hand. in fact this algo is X5 .... so its easier to make FPGA :d ... its just unknown i know it from the first qubit coin
|
|
|
|
marada
|
|
July 03, 2014, 11:50:27 PM |
|
I hope someone optimize this algo for AMD better. It seems to be the future of GPU mining. X11/X13 is already overtaken by FPGA unfortunately. Is see the diff at DRK and some other coins rising to the level GPU mining became unprofitable. Scrypt-n, due to it's extremely memory intensive design, makes cards hot and draws a lot of electricity. Qubitcoin algo uses the memory in the way it is hard to make ASIC or FPGA, but is more eco friendly at the other hand. in fact this algo is X5 .... so its easier to make FPGA :d ... its just unknown i know it from the first qubit coin Well, you may be right. I was just looking for details and found the same. What made me to think so was higher GPU memory temperature and how the memclock affects the hashrate. I used lower memclocks for x11 and had to rise it up.
|
|
|
|
marada
|
|
July 03, 2014, 11:55:45 PM Last edit: July 04, 2014, 12:06:01 AM by marada |
|
i have 1x 7790 and 1x 260x ..... both give same hash power around 2 M/HASH or 2.1 M/HASH
my setting
GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PERCENT=100 sgminer.exe -k qubitcoin -o stratum+tcp://deep.suprnova.cc:3222 -u x -p x -I 16 -g 2 -w 64 --difficulty-multiplier 256
What the clocks? I found -g 1 better for 7790, but my 7790 performs just a slightly better. I am on linux.
|
|
|
|
tacee
|
|
July 04, 2014, 12:27:19 AM |
|
I hope someone optimize this algo for AMD better. It seems to be the future of GPU mining. X11/X13 is already overtaken by FPGA unfortunately. Is see the diff at DRK and some other coins rising to the level GPU mining became unprofitable. Scrypt-n, due to it's extremely memory intensive design, makes cards hot and draws a lot of electricity. Qubitcoin algo uses the memory in the way it is hard to make ASIC or FPGA, but is more eco friendly at the other hand.* edit: appeared to be more my wish than true Yeah,wish some guy to optimize qubit algo on AMD cards. 5 seperated algos of qubit are all included by X11, if X11/13 is cracked by FPGA, so is qubit.
|
|
|
|
bitcoinvideos
|
|
July 04, 2014, 02:15:43 AM |
|
I hope someone optimize this algo for AMD better. It seems to be the future of GPU mining. X11/X13 is already overtaken by FPGA unfortunately. Is see the diff at DRK and some other coins rising to the level GPU mining became unprofitable. Scrypt-n, due to it's extremely memory intensive design, makes cards hot and draws a lot of electricity. Qubitcoin algo uses the memory in the way it is hard to make ASIC or FPGA, but is more eco friendly at the other hand.* edit: appeared to be more my wish than true Yeah,wish some guy to optimize qubit algo on AMD cards. 5 seperated algos of qubit are all included by X11, if X11/13 is cracked by FPGA, so is qubit. Ummm sorry but it's not just as "simple" as having x11 FPGA therefore qubit is...
|
|
|
|
|