[ANN] ccminer 2.3 - opensource - GPL (tpruvot)

[TimC]

ccminer 2.0 - When I try to solo mine Quark algo the program quits with an error 'quark_blake512_cpu_setBlock_80_sp' at line 577 : an illegal memory access was encountered.


ccminer-x64 -s 1 -a quark -o http://127.0.0.1:44555 -u user -p password

[1715052861]

1715052861

[1715052861]

1715052861

[1715052861]

1715052861

[1715052861]

1715052861

[m1n1ngP4d4w4n]

ccminer 2.0 - When I try to solo mine Quark algo the program quits with an error 'quark_blake512_cpu_setBlock_80_sp' at line 577 : an illegal memory access was encountered.


ccminer-x64 -s 1 -a quark -o http://127.0.0.1:44555 -u user -p password

I often encountered this when i set up overclock too high, or the overclock is wrong (like +core -mem when i need + core + mem)

[hesdeadjim]

hello everyone.




i downloaded  ccminer-2.0-rc2-cuda-6.5  and  ccminer-2.0-rc2-cuda-8.0 and i can't see any differences between the two.

of course i just started mining a couple of months ago so i only have 3 small cards.

can anyone tell me what the differences are so i can mark the files accordingly?

 thanks

[Epsylon3]

to be short, cuda 6.5 is an older compiler, but still have the best execution performance for me... these 2 compilers give different speeds regarding the algo you mine..

else yea quark is broken, and not really motivated to fix it, because there are asic with a 40x better efficiency now...

[m1n1ngP4d4w4n]

to be short, cuda 6.5 is an older compiler, but still have the best execution performance for me... these 2 compilers give different speeds regarding the algo you mine..

else yea quark is broken, and not really motivated to fix it, because there are asic with a 40x better efficiency now...

Would it be possible to fix lbry with cuda 6.5 or not possible ?

[Epsylon3]

i tried, not without losing a lot of performance on the others

[m1n1ngP4d4w4n]

i tried, not without losing a lot of performance on the others

I see, too bad then

[pokeytex]

@Epsylon3 - Do you know of a .bat file setting to get the proper hash rate to show up on a pool?  I should get around 18 mh/s but my specs constantly show 7-12 mh/s.  Is there something I should do different?

I currently use:

ccminer-x64 -a lyra2Z -o stratum+tcp://us-east.zcoin.miningpoolhub.com:20581 -u ****** -p ****** --show-diff
pause   

Thanks - pokeytex

[Epsylon3]

you need to ask that to the pool, nothing special in the miner for that

[hesdeadjim]

to be short, cuda 6.5 is an older compiler, but still have the best execution performance for me... these 2 compilers give different speeds regarding the algo you mine..

else yea quark is broken, and not really motivated to fix it, because there are asic with a 40x better efficiency now...

thanks

[joblo]

@Epsylon3 - Do you know of a .bat file setting to get the proper hash rate to show up on a pool?  I should get around 18 mh/s but my specs constantly show 7-12 mh/s.  Is there something I should do different?

I currently use:

ccminer-x64 -a lyra2Z -o stratum+tcp://us-east.zcoin.miningpoolhub.com:20581 -u ****** -p ****** --show-diff
pause    

Thanks - pokeytex

You've touched on a pet peeve of mine, please excuse the following rant.

Mining performance is measured by hash rate. The miner measures the hash rate of all scans. The pool measures
the hash rate of submitted shares. The problem is not 100% of the scans result in a submitted share. There are therefore
time gaps that reducethe effective hash rate. The miner needs to factor the failed scans to get an accurate effective
hash rate.

Latency is also a source of error. The pool measure the time from when it sent the work until the share was received.
The miner measures the time when it started hashing until it found the solution. It does not include processing or
network transmission.

There is also the issue of averaging. Most pools use a 5 minute average hash rate. If share submissions are regular the
displayed hash rate should be consistent but if shares are submitted infrequently the displayed hash rate can vary
wildly from zero to 2 or 3 times the actual hash rate depending on how many shares were submitted in the window.

[pallas]

Mismatched hashrates can result from wrong target/difficulty/bits calculation by the miner or the pool.
Then there are duplicate shares, stale shares, etc.
Can't even count all the possible causes.

[bensam1231]

@Epsylon3 - Do you know of a .bat file setting to get the proper hash rate to show up on a pool?  I should get around 18 mh/s but my specs constantly show 7-12 mh/s.  Is there something I should do different?

I currently use:

ccminer-x64 -a lyra2Z -o stratum+tcp://us-east.zcoin.miningpoolhub.com:20581 -u ****** -p ****** --show-diff
pause    

Thanks - pokeytex

Zcoin is a PoS. If you're talking about Suprnova, you'll never get normal speed there and it'll payout half of what it says it should. Not sure if it's the pool or the coin. I don't mine on Suprnova if I can all but help it. Zpool is in the same boat, only worse. Really wish Epsylon would put up a ZXC pool.

[ZenFr]

@Epsylon3 - Do you know of a .bat file setting to get the proper hash rate to show up on a pool?  I should get around 18 mh/s but my specs constantly show 7-12 mh/s.  Is there something I should do different?

I currently use:

ccminer-x64 -a lyra2Z -o stratum+tcp://us-east.zcoin.miningpoolhub.com:20581 -u ****** -p ****** --show-diff
pause    

Thanks - pokeytex

Zcoin is a PoS. If you're talking about Suprnova, you'll never get normal speed there and it'll payout half of what it says it should. Not sure if it's the pool or the coin. I don't mine on Suprnova if I can all but help it. Zpool is in the same boat, only worse. Really wish Epsylon would put up a ZXC pool.

ZCoin is not PoS.

[reb0rn21]

zcoin mining calculator is just wrong, you just get 50% less, so its not profitable to mine, its being ruled by huge AWS farms still

[pokeytex]

@Epsylon3 - Do you know of a .bat file setting to get the proper hash rate to show up on a pool?  I should get around 18 mh/s but my specs constantly show 7-12 mh/s.  Is there something I should do different?

I currently use:

ccminer-x64 -a lyra2Z -o stratum+tcp://us-east.zcoin.miningpoolhub.com:20581 -u ****** -p ****** --show-diff
pause    

Thanks - pokeytex

You've touched on a pet peeve of mine, please excuse the following rant.

Mining performance is measured by hash rate. The miner measures the hash rate of all scans. The pool measures
the hash rate of submitted shares. The problem is not 100% of the scans result in a submitted share. There are therefore
time gaps that reducethe effective hash rate. The miner needs to factor the failed scans to get an accurate effective
hash rate.

Latency is also a source of error. The pool measure the time from when it sent the work until the share was received.
The miner measures the time when it started hashing until it found the solution. It does not include processing or
network transmission.

There is also the issue of averaging. Most pools use a 5 minute average hash rate. If share submissions are regular the
displayed hash rate should be consistent but if shares are submitted infrequently the displayed hash rate can vary
wildly from zero to 2 or 3 times the actual hash rate depending on how many shares were submitted in the window.

@joblo - I have never had it explained to me like that before.  That makes a world of sense now.  Thank you so much for the insight! - pokeytex

[bensam1231]

@Epsylon3 - Do you know of a .bat file setting to get the proper hash rate to show up on a pool?  I should get around 18 mh/s but my specs constantly show 7-12 mh/s.  Is there something I should do different?

I currently use:

ccminer-x64 -a lyra2Z -o stratum+tcp://us-east.zcoin.miningpoolhub.com:20581 -u ****** -p ****** --show-diff
pause    

Thanks - pokeytex

Zcoin is a PoS. If you're talking about Suprnova, you'll never get normal speed there and it'll payout half of what it says it should. Not sure if it's the pool or the coin. I don't mine on Suprnova if I can all but help it. Zpool is in the same boat, only worse. Really wish Epsylon would put up a ZXC pool.

ZCoin is not PoS.

Pile of Shit, not Proof of Stake. ~_~

While the calculators are wrong, I'm going to reiterate that I still don't know if this is being caused by there not being any good pools available or the coin just being really bad. That's why it would've been nice if Epsylon put up a Zcoin pool as I assume the pool would be good.

Monacoin is another one that has similiar issues, all the pools suck or the coin itself really sucks and it's hard to get a consistent payout and earnings from it.

[bobrdobr2048]

SMP PREEMPT Mon Mar 13 17:13:41 CET 2017 x86_64 GNU/Linux

[root@archlinux ccminer-2.0-rc2]# gcc --version
gcc (GCC) 6.3.1 20170306
Copyright (C) 2016 Free Software Foundation, Inc.
This is free software; see the source for copying conditions.  There is NO
warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.

[root@archlinux ccminer-2.0-rc2]#./ccminer --version
cminer v2.0
libcurl/7.53.1 OpenSSL/1.0.2k zlib/1.2.11 libpsl/0.17.0 (+libicu/58.2) libssh2/1.8.0

[root@archlinux ccminer-2.0-rc2]# ./ccminer --benchmark
*** ccminer 2.0 for nVidia GPUs by tpruvot@github ***
    Built with the nVidia CUDA Toolkit 8.0 64-bits

  Originally based on Christian Buchner and Christian H. project
  Include some algos from alexis78, djm34, sp, tsiv and klausT.

BTC donation address: 1AJdfCpLWPNoAMDfHF1wD5y8VgKSSTHxPo (tpruvot)

[2017-03-17 16:15:51] Starting benchmark mode with blakecoin
[2017-03-17 16:15:51] NVML GPU monitoring enabled.
[2017-03-17 16:15:51] 1 miner thread started, using 'blakecoin' algorithm.
[2017-03-17 16:15:51] GPU #0: Intensity set to 22, 4194304 cuda threads
Cuda error in func 'blake256_cpu_setBlock_16' at line 467 : invalid device symbol.


[root@archlinux ccminer-2.0-rc2]# ./ccminer --benchmark -a sib
*** ccminer 2.0 for nVidia GPUs by tpruvot@github ***
    Built with the nVidia CUDA Toolkit 8.0 64-bits

  Originally based on Christian Buchner and Christian H. project
  Include some algos from alexis78, djm34, sp, tsiv and klausT.

BTC donation address: 1AJdfCpLWPNoAMDfHF1wD5y8VgKSSTHxPo (tpruvot)

[2017-03-17 16:22:18] NVML GPU monitoring enabled.
[2017-03-17 16:22:18] 1 miner thread started, using 'sib' algorithm.
[2017-03-17 16:22:18] GPU #0: Intensity set to 18, 262144 cuda threads
[2017-03-17 16:22:18] GPU #0: aes_cpu_init invalid device symbol
[2017-03-17 16:22:19] GPU #0: aes_cpu_init invalid device symbol
[2017-03-17 16:22:20] GPU #0: quark_blake512_cpu_setBlock_80:318 invalid device symbol
Cuda error in func 'cuda_check_cpu_setTarget' at line 41 : invalid device symbol.

[root@archlinux ccminer-2.0-rc2]# sudo lshw -c display
  *-display                
       description: VGA compatible controller
       product: GF114 [GeForce GTX 560 SE]
       vendor: NVIDIA Corporation
       physical id: 0
       bus info: pci@0000:01:00.0
       version: a1
       width: 64 bits
       clock: 33MHz
       capabilities: pm msi pciexpress vga_controller bus_master cap_list rom
       configuration: driver=nvidia latency=0
       resources: irq:29 memory:fc000000-fdffffff memory:d8000000-dfffffff memory:d4000000-d7ffffff ioport:cc00(size=128) memory:c0000-dffff


[spoiler]
[root@archlinux ccminer-2.0-rc2]# cat /proc/cpuinfo
processor   : 0
vendor_id   : GenuineIntel
cpu family   : 6
model      : 23
model name   : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU     E8400  @ 3.00GHz
stepping   : 10
microcode   : 0xa07
cpu MHz      : 2003.000
cache size   : 6144 KB
physical id   : 0
siblings   : 2
core id      : 0
cpu cores   : 2
apicid      : 0
initial apicid   : 0
fpu      : yes
fpu_exception   : yes
cpuid level   : 13
wp      : yes
flags      : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts rep_good nopl aperfmperf pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx smx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr pdcm sse4_1 xsave lahf_lm tpr_shadow vnmi flexpriority dtherm
bugs      :
bogomips   : 6022.92
clflush size   : 64
cache_alignment   : 64
address sizes   : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
power management:

processor   : 1
vendor_id   : GenuineIntel
cpu family   : 6
model      : 23
model name   : Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU     E8400  @ 3.00GHz
stepping   : 10
microcode   : 0xa07
cpu MHz      : 2003.000
cache size   : 6144 KB
physical id   : 0
siblings   : 2
core id      : 1
cpu cores   : 2
apicid      : 1
initial apicid   : 1
fpu      : yes
fpu_exception   : yes
cpuid level   : 13
wp      : yes
flags      : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge mca cmov pat pse36 clflush dts acpi mmx fxsr sse sse2 ss ht tm pbe syscall nx lm constant_tsc arch_perfmon pebs bts rep_good nopl aperfmperf pni dtes64 monitor ds_cpl vmx smx est tm2 ssse3 cx16 xtpr pdcm sse4_1 xsave lahf_lm tpr_shadow vnmi flexpriority dtherm
bugs      :
bogomips   : 6022.87[spoiler]
clflush size   : 64
cache_alignment   : 64
address sizes   : 36 bits physical, 48 bits virtual
power management:
[/spoiler]


 

[Epsylon3]

read the first post

[bobrdobr2048]

read the first post

It says

My releases are generally tuned for the Geforce GTX 750Ti

Does that mean GTX 560 SE is not supported?