Bitcoin Forum
May 01, 2017, 06:31:50 AM *
News: Latest stable version of Bitcoin Core: 0.14.1  [Torrent]. (New!)
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
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 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 ... 86 »
  Print  
Author Topic: [ANN] ccminer 2.0 - opensource - GPL (tpruvot)  (Read 198874 times)
sp_
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1022

Ccminer developer


View Profile
November 12, 2014, 06:23:06 AM
 #41

Good work on the intensity parameter. Did you fix the reported average rate bug? It looked like the beta version reported the average rate per card, and not the average rate on the whole rig.

BTC: 1CTiNJyoUmbdMRACtteRWXhGqtSETYd6Vd
1493620310
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1493620310

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1493620310
Reply with quote  #2

1493620310
Report to moderator
I HATE TABLES I HATE TABLES I HA(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ TABLES I HATE TABLES I HATE TABLES
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1493620310
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1493620310

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1493620310
Reply with quote  #2

1493620310
Report to moderator
1493620310
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1493620310

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1493620310
Reply with quote  #2

1493620310
Report to moderator
1493620310
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1493620310

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1493620310
Reply with quote  #2

1493620310
Report to moderator
Epsylon3
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 952


ccminer/cpuminer developer


View Profile WWW
November 12, 2014, 06:52:39 AM
 #42

no indeed Wink i just fixed it (will be in next version, or git)

BTC: 1FhDPLPpw18X4srecguG3MxJYe4a1JsZnd - My Projects: ccminer - cpuminer-multi - yiimp - Forum threads : ccminer - cpuminer-multi - yiimp
SS2006
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 272


View Profile
November 12, 2014, 07:07:43 AM
 #43

epsylon, i have a gtx 970 (5.2 right?)

but for some reason when i use ccminer50 instead of 52, i ALWAYS get better hashrate, less out of range errors, and just more accepts in general. This was the same case with SPminers betas etc..

any ideas why this happens?
Epsylon3
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 952


ccminer/cpuminer developer


View Profile WWW
November 12, 2014, 07:09:56 AM
 #44

yes its 5.2, hmm i'm not sure about that for the moment Wink maybe the right cuda sdk is required ? on windows ?

BTC: 1FhDPLPpw18X4srecguG3MxJYe4a1JsZnd - My Projects: ccminer - cpuminer-multi - yiimp - Forum threads : ccminer - cpuminer-multi - yiimp
SS2006
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 272


View Profile
November 12, 2014, 08:42:54 AM
 #45

is there any real advantage to downloading and installing the 1 GB large CUDA 6.5 SDK. I figure if the miner runs, then I have everything in place already
djm34
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036


View Profile WWW
November 12, 2014, 01:08:07 PM
 #46

epsylon, i have a gtx 970 (5.2 right?)

but for some reason when i use ccminer50 instead of 52, i ALWAYS get better hashrate, less out of range errors, and just more accepts in general. This was the same case with SPminers betas etc..

any ideas why this happens?
registers... for some reason 5.2 doesn't like to allocate too much register...

djm34 facebook page
BTC: 1NENYmxwZGHsKFmyjTc5WferTn5VTFb7Ze
Pledge for neoscrypt ccminer to that address: 16UoC4DmTz2pvhFvcfTQrzkPTrXkWijzXw
Epsylon3
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 952


ccminer/cpuminer developer


View Profile WWW
November 12, 2014, 03:15:53 PM
 #47

is there any real advantage to downloading and installing the 1 GB large CUDA 6.5 SDK. I figure if the miner runs, then I have everything in place already

no indeed, i dont think so...

API is almost ready (limited to localhost for the moment, will add the config key to change that)

BTC: 1FhDPLPpw18X4srecguG3MxJYe4a1JsZnd - My Projects: ccminer - cpuminer-multi - yiimp - Forum threads : ccminer - cpuminer-multi - yiimp
tbearhere
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078



View Profile
November 12, 2014, 03:20:51 PM
 #48

is there any real advantage to downloading and installing the 1 GB large CUDA 6.5 SDK. I figure if the miner runs, then I have everything in place already

no indeed, i dont think so...

API is almost ready (limited to localhost for the moment, will add the config key to change that)
my read out for quark



did i compile wrong?
4 750ti  cards hashing at10mh/s      total 10mh ?

It's all a question of balance.
Epsylon3
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 952


ccminer/cpuminer developer


View Profile WWW
November 12, 2014, 03:34:34 PM
 #49

2 algos hashrates were divided by 2... quark and jackpot, i dont really know why... I removed the divider

sample api output of php api-example.php :
Code:
{
"summary":{"NAME":"ccminer","VER":"1.4.8","API":"1.0","ALGO":"blake","KHS":"216674.14","ACC":"4","REJ":"0","ACCMN":"3.429","UPTIME":"70"},
"stats":{"GPU0":{"GPU":"0","TEMP":"0.0","FAN":"0","FANP":"0","KHS":"216674.15","HWF":"0","I":"0"}}
}

you can copy/paste that in http://json.parser.online.fr/

will change some keys... adding UP (uptime), ACM (accepted/minute)

v1.4.8 will be released today (to fix the multi gpu displayed hashrate)

BTC: 1FhDPLPpw18X4srecguG3MxJYe4a1JsZnd - My Projects: ccminer - cpuminer-multi - yiimp - Forum threads : ccminer - cpuminer-multi - yiimp
Epsylon3
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 952


ccminer/cpuminer developer


View Profile WWW
November 12, 2014, 05:01:52 PM
 #50

did i compile wrong?
4 750ti  cards hashing at10mh/s      total 10mh ?

fixed in 1.4.8 (else on git since this morning) release in a few minutes

BTC: 1FhDPLPpw18X4srecguG3MxJYe4a1JsZnd - My Projects: ccminer - cpuminer-multi - yiimp - Forum threads : ccminer - cpuminer-multi - yiimp
antonio8
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1050


View Profile
November 12, 2014, 05:53:24 PM
 #51

Not sure if Epsylon3 has asked but I'll will for him

PLEASE DONATE  to him for his work he has been putting in and improving his miner.

We should donate to all these devs that put out these miners and enhancements. Without them we would have nothing.

If you are going to leave your BTC on an exchange please send it to this address instead 1GH3ub3UUHbU5qDJW5u3E9jZ96ZEmzaXtG, I will at least use the money better than someone who steals it from the exchange. Thanks Wink
tbearhere
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078



View Profile
November 12, 2014, 05:55:01 PM
 #52

did i compile wrong?
4 750ti  cards hashing at10mh/s      total 10mh ?

fixed in 1.4.8 (else on git since this morning) release in a few minutes
Epsylon3 there is an improvement in hash.  on 1.4.7. waiting for 1.4.8.  Smiley

It's all a question of balance.
tbearhere
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078



View Profile
November 12, 2014, 06:07:02 PM
 #53

Not sure if Epsylon3 has asked but I'll will for him

PLEASE DONATE  to him for his work he has been putting in and improving his miner.

We should donate to all these devs that put out these miners and enhancements. Without them we would have nothing.
+1 on that
Look at all these people reading and are they donating?
3743
PLEASE DONATE to ALL involved in cuda and ccminer.

It's all a question of balance.
BrewCrewFan
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 672



View Profile
November 12, 2014, 09:54:25 PM
 #54

Not sure if Epsylon3 has asked but I'll will for him

PLEASE DONATE  to him for his work he has been putting in and improving his miner.

We should donate to all these devs that put out these miners and enhancements. Without them we would have nothing.
+1 on that
Look at all these people reading and are they donating.
3743
PLEASE DONATE to ALL involved in cuda and ccminer.

Even at a fraction of a BTC per user it would all add up rather fast.

Free SIGNs giving everyday. Be part, do not miss!.
SqMe5ceYfdcGsRyVpgvpYb6bRLS9j8omvB

XChat : Addy : XYuZESQpeMtZ2wit8nVVnXKGytfiaTBCo6 PubKey : eteshLzeq8Bh54BRjGSunMTc6Ytxtk7HYaSmDYMQn61z
tbearhere
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078



View Profile
November 13, 2014, 02:40:22 PM
 #55

Epsylon3  1.4.8  still gives readout of 40mh/s, 4 750ti, when cards are doing 20mh/s quark.

It's all a question of balance.
Epsylon3
Legendary
*
Online Online

Activity: 952


ccminer/cpuminer developer


View Profile WWW
November 13, 2014, 02:59:15 PM
 #56

hmm... no... one 750Ti card do 10MH

BTC: 1FhDPLPpw18X4srecguG3MxJYe4a1JsZnd - My Projects: ccminer - cpuminer-multi - yiimp - Forum threads : ccminer - cpuminer-multi - yiimp
tsiv
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 137


View Profile
November 13, 2014, 04:54:49 PM
 #57

hmm... no... one 750Ti card do 10MH

That would be a 100% boost compared to ccminer 1.2, either you're a wizard or there's something funky with your rate calculations. Not to say you and sp_ haven't done a good job on optimizing various algos, but I do find the latter a lot more likely Smiley
djm34
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036


View Profile WWW
November 13, 2014, 05:17:16 PM
 #58

hmm... no... one 750Ti card do 10MH

That would be a 100% boost compared to ccminer 1.2, either you're a wizard or there's something funky with your rate calculations. Not to say you and sp_ haven't done a good job on optimizing various algos, but I do find the latter a lot more likely Smiley
not sure I really followed...
but the hashrate in jpc is divided by two, because it hashes only on certain chain where it is faster and doesn't look at the slowest one... (because of large imbalance is hashrate of the various chain of algo, it is globaly faster to ignore few algo combination rather than computing everything blindly...)
Therefore the total hashrate before the division isn't the total hashrate for every possible algo combination but only those computed by ccminer.
Hence the reason why it is divided by two...
(I will spare you the probability calculation which says it is the right thing to do  Grin)

Don't know the reason for quark (ask Christian), could be a similar reason since there are also various random chains...

djm34 facebook page
BTC: 1NENYmxwZGHsKFmyjTc5WferTn5VTFb7Ze
Pledge for neoscrypt ccminer to that address: 16UoC4DmTz2pvhFvcfTQrzkPTrXkWijzXw
tsiv
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 137


View Profile
November 13, 2014, 05:27:28 PM
 #59

hmm... no... one 750Ti card do 10MH

That would be a 100% boost compared to ccminer 1.2, either you're a wizard or there's something funky with your rate calculations. Not to say you and sp_ haven't done a good job on optimizing various algos, but I do find the latter a lot more likely Smiley
not sure I really followed...
but the hashrate in jpc is divided by two, because it hashes only on certain chain where it is faster and doesn't look at the slowest one... (because of large imbalance is hashrate of the various chain of algo, it is globaly faster to ignore few algo combination rather than computing everything blindly...)
Therefore the total hashrate before the division isn't the total hashrate for every possible algo combination but only those computed by ccminer.
Hence the reason why it is divided by two...
(I will spare you the probability calculation which says it is the right thing to do  Grin)

Don't know the reason for quark (ask Christian), could be a similar reason since there are also various random chains...

Sounds dead-on correct, didn't actually think of that. Quark starts with two relatively fast algos, third would be groestl or skein depending on one bit in the second algos output but the nonces that lead down the groestl branch get discarded. Dividing by two isn't exactly right but it's a statistically fair estimate of the actual hashes finished.
djm34
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1036


View Profile WWW
November 13, 2014, 05:37:57 PM
 #60

hmm... no... one 750Ti card do 10MH

That would be a 100% boost compared to ccminer 1.2, either you're a wizard or there's something funky with your rate calculations. Not to say you and sp_ haven't done a good job on optimizing various algos, but I do find the latter a lot more likely Smiley
not sure I really followed...
but the hashrate in jpc is divided by two, because it hashes only on certain chain where it is faster and doesn't look at the slowest one... (because of large imbalance is hashrate of the various chain of algo, it is globaly faster to ignore few algo combination rather than computing everything blindly...)
Therefore the total hashrate before the division isn't the total hashrate for every possible algo combination but only those computed by ccminer.
Hence the reason why it is divided by two...
(I will spare you the probability calculation which says it is the right thing to do  Grin)

Don't know the reason for quark (ask Christian), could be a similar reason since there are also various random chains...

Sounds dead-on correct, didn't actually think of that. Quark starts with two relatively fast algos, third would be groestl or skein depending on one bit in the second algos output but the nonces that lead down the groestl branch get discarded. Dividing by two isn't exactly right but it's a statistically fair estimate of the actual hashes finished.
kind of silly to put groestl and skein in a uniform random choice  Grin
for jpc, using bernouilli functions, it is exactly a factor 2

djm34 facebook page
BTC: 1NENYmxwZGHsKFmyjTc5WferTn5VTFb7Ze
Pledge for neoscrypt ccminer to that address: 16UoC4DmTz2pvhFvcfTQrzkPTrXkWijzXw
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 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 ... 86 »
  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!