CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded GPU kernels.

[sp_]

Submitted a 10% increase in skeincoin.
The change was done in the sha-256 implementation
-Reduced register usage by moving constants from constmem to the instruction   cache
-bether launch configuration
-bether default intensity

The last pass of skeincoin is a pure SHA-256 pass(bitcoin) Probobly it would be bether to use the bitcoin kernal implemented by klaus_t.
Or any ASIC miner in hybrid mining.
NVIDIA does the SKEIN and the asic's does the sha256 and the search.

I'm guessing you don't know how ASIC miners are implemented...
It returns winning nonces, not hashes - it functions as a BTC-mining black-box.

I dont need the hash, i need the wining nounce. (in skeincoin the SHA-256 is the last pass)
But I need to feed the Hardware with input data, and this is not supported or is it?

[sp_]

I just put the data of a 750ti light overclock in a  Myriadcoin Profitability Calculator
I I can boost the hashrate from 60 to 82 MHASH(36.6%) it will be more profitable than mining qubit.


http://birdonwheels5.no-ip.org/profit-calc/
 

[chrysophylax]

I just put the data of a 750ti light overclock in a

Myriadcoin Profitability Calculator

http://birdonwheels5.no-ip.org/profit-calc/
 

these are NEVER accurate sp ...

its based on the current diff and the current availability of miners ...

the moment you put another miner on there - especially if its a farm - that blows the so called 'profitability' out the window ...

i do like quibit tho ...

#crysx

[sp_]

these are NEVER accurate sp ...
its based on the current diff and the current availability of miners ...
the moment you put another miner on there - especially if its a farm - that blows the so called 'profitability' out the window ...
i do like quibit tho ...
#crysx

I know, but calculators say something about the speed of the hashing algo. People usually don't mine when the miner use more power than it gains. Some of the miners have
faster mining software or hardware.

Bitcoin is not profitable on GPU's (ASIC's)
Scrypt is not profitable on GPU's (ASIC's)
groestl is not profitable on NVIDIA GPU's. (AMD has a fast opensource implementation).
SKEIN could be profitable with some work on NVIDIA. What is the speed on AMD cards?
QUBIT is faster on NVIDIA

Also note that qubit ccminer spmod version 44 is

1750% more profitable to mine than SCRYPT in cudaminer. (on the same hardware. 750ti OC)

[chrysophylax]

these are NEVER accurate sp ...
its based on the current diff and the current availability of miners ...
the moment you put another miner on there - especially if its a farm - that blows the so called 'profitability' out the window ...
i do like quibit tho ...
#crysx

I know, but calculators say something about the speed of the hashing algo. People usually don't mine when the miner use more power than it gains. Some of the miners have
faster mining software or hardware.

Bitcoin is not profitable on GPU's (ASIC's)
Scrypt is not profitable on GPU's (ASIC's)
groestl is not profitable on NVIDIA GPU's. (AMD has a fast opensource implementation).
SKEIN could be profitable with some work on NVIDIA. What is the speed on AMD cards?
QUBIT is faster on NVIDIA

Also note that qubit ccminer spmod version 44 is

1750% more profitable to mine than SCRYPT in cudaminer. (on the same hardware. 750ti OC)

agreed ... if its about the profitability ...

though wouldnt it make sense to focus on the algos that are implemented in ccminer ( nvidia ) and optimize them to the fullest extent they can go? ...

possibly implement more algos to your fork and make it an all round better miner - even if amd have better opensource implementations ...

unless of course it is possible for ccminer to have both nvidia and amd implementations ...

#crysx

[sp_]

agreed ... if its about the profitability ...
though wouldnt it make sense to focus on the algos that are implemented in ccminer ( nvidia ) and optimize them to the fullest extent they can go? ...
possibly implement more algos to your fork and make it an all round better miner - even if amd have better opensource implementations ...
unless of course it is possible for ccminer to have both nvidia and amd implementations ...
#crysx

I will focus on the algos that give a profit. But the profit keeps changing, so in the end most of the algos are faster.

But in small steps. Optimizing is time consuming.

After Wolf0's x11,x13 and x15 binaries leaked he stopped optimizing them and moved over to other algos.. It doesn't meen that the wolf0's x11 implentation is the fastest possible.

[chrysophylax]

agreed ... if its about the profitability ...
though wouldnt it make sense to focus on the algos that are implemented in ccminer ( nvidia ) and optimize them to the fullest extent they can go? ...
possibly implement more algos to your fork and make it an all round better miner - even if amd have better opensource implementations ...
unless of course it is possible for ccminer to have both nvidia and amd implementations ...
#crysx

I will focus on the algos that give a profit. But the profit keeps changing, so in the end most of the algos are faster.

But in small steps. Optimizing is time consuming.

After Wolf0's x11,x13 and x15 binaries leaked he stopped optimizing them and moved over to other algos.. It doesn't meen that the wolf0's x11 implentation is the fastest possible.

of course ... i guess the whole concept of optimization is spending time and effort to make the algo perform better - and faster ...

profitability plays a big part in that area - otherwise its not worth it - i understand ...

so if i understand correctly - there is more to be had in the way of better and faster performance with most of these algos - including x11 x13 x15? ...

#crysx

[ol92]

agreed ... if its about the profitability ...
though wouldnt it make sense to focus on the algos that are implemented in ccminer ( nvidia ) and optimize them to the fullest extent they can go? ...
possibly implement more algos to your fork and make it an all round better miner - even if amd have better opensource implementations ...
unless of course it is possible for ccminer to have both nvidia and amd implementations ...
#crysx

I will focus on the algos that give a profit. But the profit keeps changing, so in the end most of the algos are faster.

But in small steps. Optimizing is time consuming.

After Wolf0's x11,x13 and x15 binaries leaked he stopped optimizing them and moved over to other algos.. It doesn't meen that the wolf0's x11 implentation is the fastest possible.

ccminer was profitable with whirlpoolx, but smelter released a miner with >500mh/s for 1 280X (https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=977245.900). Now this an amd only coin. A GTX 980 can do almost 300mh/s which used to be good, few weeks ago.

If you can do something like 600mh/s for a GTX 980, it will be profitable again.

[sp_]

QUARK algo @yaamp multipool: (13-april-2015)

AMD GPU miners: 0.72%
CPU miners: 0.09%
ccminer: 99,19% (sp-mod: 95,79%)

Quark does 20MHASH on the gtx 980 with overclocking in the latest sp-mod

Smolen's  "Smelter - GPU miner for Quark-based coins" is doing 2 MHASH on the 280x

The same power consumption

[sp_]

of course ... i guess the whole concept of optimization is spending time and effort to make the algo perform better - and faster ...
profitability plays a big part in that area - otherwise its not worth it - i understand ...
so if i understand correctly - there is more to be had in the way of better and faster performance with most of these algos - including x11 x13 x15? ...
#crysx

x11,x13 and x15 can be alot faster on NVIDIA if all of the AES implementations are rewritten.

In my quark implementation the chained algorithms are running in parallel, and the speed of the total hash is just a little bit slower than the slowest of the algos wich is groestl.

This meens that quark is not much more secure than groestl with a proper implementation. When kernals are running in parallell, they use 0 time.

Go and write a paper about it.

On bitcointalk.org all we care about it profit and hashrate.

[MaxDZ8]

You probably mean they run pipelined (pipelined != parallel).

[chrysophylax]

of course ... i guess the whole concept of optimization is spending time and effort to make the algo perform better - and faster ...
profitability plays a big part in that area - otherwise its not worth it - i understand ...
so if i understand correctly - there is more to be had in the way of better and faster performance with most of these algos - including x11 x13 x15? ...
#crysx

x11,x13 and x15 can be alot faster on NVIDIA if all of the AES implementations are rewritten.

In my quark implementation the chained algorithms are running in parallel, and the speed of the total hash is just a little bit slower than the slowest of the algos wich is groestl.

This meens that quark is not much more secure than groestl with a proper implementation. When kernals are running in parallell, they use 0 time.

Go and write a paper about it.

On bitcointalk.org all we care about it profit and hashrate.

mate - im not in the business of writing papers - nor are we in the business of making it all about profit for the short term ...

its about performance and hashrate - agreed ... but also consistency and reliability ... once that is optimal - the profit and the rest follow ...

you and the other devs have a great deal of respect from us lowly miners ... ...

but thats one thing we know how to do REALLY well ... mine! ...

#crysx

[tbearhere]

Yesterday I found out that the hefty 1 algo (mjolnir,heavycoin,securecoin?) is producing wrong results.
Are there any other coins that are using this algo?
If not, I will remove the support in my fork

unfortunately i do not know of any others ...
but i do have a question ... are you going to implement the spreadcoinx11 algo ( amongst some others ) in this fork as you previously mentioned? ...
tanx sp ...
#crysx

I might add scrypt-n..

Just checked, not many profitable scrypt-n coins out there..

Spreadcoin is still only for the donators. New version is coming soon with more hash.

tanx sp ...

we are one of the donors ...

but i thought i would ask due to it being a pain in the backside to continue changing miners on EVERY worker in the farm when we want to mine sprx11 ...

would be so much easier if it was within the one miner ...

tanx again ...

#crysx

Yes for me too. It would be easier if sp put them into one miner. How about it sp.

[antonio8]

Yesterday I found out that the hefty 1 algo (mjolnir,heavycoin,securecoin?) is producing wrong results.
Are there any other coins that are using this algo?
If not, I will remove the support in my fork

unfortunately i do not know of any others ...
but i do have a question ... are you going to implement the spreadcoinx11 algo ( amongst some others ) in this fork as you previously mentioned? ...
tanx sp ...
#crysx

I might add scrypt-n..

Just checked, not many profitable scrypt-n coins out there..

Spreadcoin is still only for the donators. New version is coming soon with more hash.

tanx sp ...

we are one of the donors ...

but i thought i would ask due to it being a pain in the backside to continue changing miners on EVERY worker in the farm when we want to mine sprx11 ...

would be so much easier if it was within the one miner ...

tanx again ...

#crysx

Yes for me too. It would be easier if sp put them into one miner. How about it sp.

Then non donors would have SPR.

I agree to keep them separate.

[sp_]

I will add some more algos.

I'm Planning to add  Bitcredits and scryptn.

[djm34]

I will add some more algos.

I'm Planning to add  Bitcredits and scryptn.

bitcredits ? what is that ?

[antonio8]

I will add some more algos.

I'm Planning to add  Bitcredits and scryptn.

bitcredits ? what is that ?

SHHH.

[tbearhere]

Yesterday I found out that the hefty 1 algo (mjolnir,heavycoin,securecoin?) is producing wrong results.
Are there any other coins that are using this algo?
If not, I will remove the support in my fork

unfortunately i do not know of any others ...
but i do have a question ... are you going to implement the spreadcoinx11 algo ( amongst some others ) in this fork as you previously mentioned? ...
tanx sp ...
#crysx

I might add scrypt-n..

Just checked, not many profitable scrypt-n coins out there..

Spreadcoin is still only for the donators. New version is coming soon with more hash.

tanx sp ...

we are one of the donors ...

but i thought i would ask due to it being a pain in the backside to continue changing miners on EVERY worker in the farm when we want to mine sprx11 ...

would be so much easier if it was within the one miner ...

tanx again ...

#crysx

Yes for me too. It would be easier if sp put them into one miner. How about it sp.

Then non donors would have SPR.

I agree to keep them separate.

Or one miner that has all algo's for people that contributed and one that has all algo's except the special algo that people didnt. ie release 44 is for general people and a lets say 44srp that has 44 + SRP miner in it for people that contribute like me. That way I don't have to switch miners. 

[tbearhere]

I will add some more algos.

I'm Planning to add  Bitcredits and scryptn.

bitcredits ? what is that ?

SHHH.

Yes what is it?

[hack_]

I will add some more algos.

I'm Planning to add  Bitcredits and scryptn.

bitcredits ? what is that ?

SHHH.

Yes what is it?

The future, that guy is amazing.