CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded GPU kernels.

[CapnBDL]

Anyone using some 960s? What are you getting for Quark/X11/Neo?
I assume ccminer doesn't scale and needs to be tailored to each cards gen.

you can get 10mhash if you overclock. With standard clocks around 9.2 Mhash

GTX 960--

Mining Quark, I get 10.5Mh/s with +80mhz/240mhz core/mem on the 2gb 960 SSC card with default intensity.  It runs on Win 7 x64.

--scryptr

Thanks for the replies, so it's pretty much on par with it's price point ($200 vs $300 970).

Still looks like the 750tis are the best buy, but they suck balls for density.

Does it pay to OC memory at all? It doesn't seem like memory clocks matter at all with Nvidia compared to AMD.

I can tell you that on my 750Ti...what you do with the mem clock matters quite a bit. Surprisingly, I underclock the mem on 1 of my settings to keep it stable.

[1714925297]

1714925297

[1714925297]

1714925297

[1714925297]

1714925297

[sambiohazard]

What do ya know...ccminer.exe compile worked. Next question....what do I delete now...everything in that dir or do I keep it.

Thank you again....think I'll copy those instructions and save 'em someplace.

That was fast. You only really need ccminer.exe. You can delete the rest of the tree.

Edit: For the really addventurous you can also compile in a VM. The only difference is don't
install the drivers with cuda. Probably shouln't do that in any case if you already have
newer drivers already iinstalled. I do that on a linux host because that system has the fastest cpu.

As I said in an earlier post, I've tried to compile in the past, but I musta missed a step or something. Your explanation was very good, easy to follow. Already had the needed programs installed. I tired it with git-work ( or whatever it is) a few times also..didn't work out well. I've saved the instructions...we'll see if I can get it to work, in the future.  Thanks....


edit: now if I could just find out what the difference is between scryptN, scryptNf (same or not), and blake, blake2b (same or not)? And do those use the same miner setup? It gets confusing when the names are so close.   

scrypt is good old scrypt with n factor of 1
scrypt-N uses double the memory per hash and this is fixed.(n factor fixed at 2)
scrypt-N factor has changing/increasing memory requirement with time and you have to change your .bat every time as GPU's memory is fixed.(N factor 2-16 with time, most i have seen)

Does this help? I dont know about blake.

[CapnBDL]

What do ya know...ccminer.exe compile worked. Next question....what do I delete now...everything in that dir or do I keep it.

Thank you again....think I'll copy those instructions and save 'em someplace.

That was fast. You only really need ccminer.exe. You can delete the rest of the tree.

Edit: For the really addventurous you can also compile in a VM. The only difference is don't
install the drivers with cuda. Probably shouln't do that in any case if you already have
newer drivers already iinstalled. I do that on a linux host because that system has the fastest cpu.

As I said in an earlier post, I've tried to compile in the past, but I musta missed a step or something. Your explanation was very good, easy to follow. Already had the needed programs installed. I tired it with git-work ( or whatever it is) a few times also..didn't work out well. I've saved the instructions...we'll see if I can get it to work, in the future.  Thanks....


edit: now if I could just find out what the difference is between scryptN, scryptNf (same or not), and blake, blake2b (same or not)? And do those use the same miner setup? It gets confusing when the names are so close.  

scrypt is good old scrypt with n factor of 1
scrypt-N uses double the memory per hash and this is fixed.(n factor fixed at 2)
scrypt-N factor has changing/increasing memory requirement with time and you have to change your .bat every time as GPU's memory is fixed.(N factor 2-16 with time, most i have seen)

Does this help? I dont know about blake.

Some....does that mean that they can be mined with the same program (ie, ccminer), but you have to use the 'switches' to adjust for the (sounds like) slight differences (mem requirements) in algo?

[pallas]

What do ya know...ccminer.exe compile worked. Next question....what do I delete now...everything in that dir or do I keep it.

Thank you again....think I'll copy those instructions and save 'em someplace.

That was fast. You only really need ccminer.exe. You can delete the rest of the tree.

Edit: For the really addventurous you can also compile in a VM. The only difference is don't
install the drivers with cuda. Probably shouln't do that in any case if you already have
newer drivers already iinstalled. I do that on a linux host because that system has the fastest cpu.

As I said in an earlier post, I've tried to compile in the past, but I musta missed a step or something. Your explanation was very good, easy to follow. Already had the needed programs installed. I tired it with git-work ( or whatever it is) a few times also..didn't work out well. I've saved the instructions...we'll see if I can get it to work, in the future.  Thanks....


edit: now if I could just find out what the difference is between scryptN, scryptNf (same or not), and blake, blake2b (same or not)? And do those use the same miner setup? It gets confusing when the names are so close.   

scrypt is good old scrypt with n factor of 1
scrypt-N uses double the memory per hash and this is fixed.(n factor fixed at 2)
scrypt-N factor has changing/increasing memory requirement with time and you have to change your .bat every time as GPU's memory is fixed.(N factor 2-16 with time, most i have seen)

Does this help? I dont know about blake.

Hmmm no.
Plain scrypt has an n-factor of 10.
Scrypt-n, as in vertcoin and many others, starts at 11 and goes up with time (see the vertcoin thread).
Scrypt with adaptive n-factor, or scrypt-jane, like in yacoin, has a different algorithm for the n-factor and different hash.

[CapnBDL]

What do ya know...ccminer.exe compile worked. Next question....what do I delete now...everything in that dir or do I keep it.

Thank you again....think I'll copy those instructions and save 'em someplace.

That was fast. You only really need ccminer.exe. You can delete the rest of the tree.

Edit: For the really addventurous you can also compile in a VM. The only difference is don't
install the drivers with cuda. Probably shouln't do that in any case if you already have
newer drivers already iinstalled. I do that on a linux host because that system has the fastest cpu.

As I said in an earlier post, I've tried to compile in the past, but I musta missed a step or something. Your explanation was very good, easy to follow. Already had the needed programs installed. I tired it with git-work ( or whatever it is) a few times also..didn't work out well. I've saved the instructions...we'll see if I can get it to work, in the future.  Thanks....


edit: now if I could just find out what the difference is between scryptN, scryptNf (same or not), and blake, blake2b (same or not)? And do those use the same miner setup? It gets confusing when the names are so close.   

scrypt is good old scrypt with n factor of 1
scrypt-N uses double the memory per hash and this is fixed.(n factor fixed at 2)
scrypt-N factor has changing/increasing memory requirement with time and you have to change your .bat every time as GPU's memory is fixed.(N factor 2-16 with time, most i have seen)

Does this help? I dont know about blake.

Hmmm no.
Plain scrypt has an n-factor of 10.
Scrypt-n, as in vertcoin and many others, starts at 11 and goes up with time (see the vertcoin thread).
Scrypt with adaptive n-factor, or scrypt-jane, like in yacoin, has a different algorithm for the n-factor and different hash.

OK ?  Back to my question.....are these algos able to be mined with ccminer (/w adjustments)? And does something similar go on /w the 2 blake algos. I don't think I'll ever mine any of them (/w the exception of scrypt) but it would be nice to know if I could.

[sp_]

Try -a blake. 250mhash on the 750ti

[CapnBDL]

@sp_

I'm getting nothing. No shares are being solved. According to GPUTweak..the power % is jumping all over the scale, voltage is constant 1093mV, temp does rise as if it is working, vram usage is very low yet GPU usage would indicate it is mining, but I get no shares accepted. Did get a couple rejects /w reason...H-not-zero.

ASUS GTX750Ti DFseries 2GB /w 6pin ribbon. Ran in OC as well as stock. Just -a blake.  Not a very good pool tho. Had trouble getting into, ..slow. Will look for a better pool.

edit: just tried to solo and again nothing, no connect. is port 8772 correct?  Oh, when I say nothing, I mean that the .bat runs, but isn't giving much info. I did get the one above tho. Maybe that will help.

      reject reason......H-not-zero

[joblo]

@sp_

I'm getting nothing. No shares are being solved. According to GPUTweak..the power % is jumping all over the scale, voltage is constant 1093mV, temp does rise as if it is working, vram usage is very low yet GPU usage would indicate it is mining, but I get no shares accepted. Did get a couple rejects /w reason...H-not-zero.

ASUS GTX750Ti DFseries 2GB /w 6pin ribbon. Ran in OC as well as stock. Just -a blake.  Not a very good pool tho. Had trouble getting into, ..slow. Will look for a better pool.

edit: just tried to solo and again nothing, no connect. is port 8772 correct?  Oh, when I say nothing, I mean that the .bat runs, but isn't giving much info. I did get the one above tho. Maybe that will help.

      reject reason......H-not-zero

I think a lot of these tweaks to algos are done intentionally to break compatibility with current miners,
particularly ASIC miners.

[Nubminer]

when I try to load the project I get an error
ccminer-windows\ccminer-windows\ccminer.vcxproj : error  : Unable to read the project file "ccminer.vcxproj".

C:\ccminer-windows\ccminer.vcxproj(57,5): The imported project "C:\Program Files (x86)\MSBuild\Microsoft.Cpp\v4.0\V120\BuildCustomizations\CUDA 6.5.props" was not found. Confirm that the path in the <Import> declaration is correct, and that the file exists on disk.

I opened up the vcxproj in notepad and edited the two lines to reference CUDA 7.0.props

Now I can open the project....
and compile seemed to work and runs but I am not getting any of the hashes to validate on CPU

So I have a couple of questions.

in your list of steps you say to verify release, 32   ( not sure what you mean here. ) ?? EDIT 5/31/15 ( NM I found it)

then in the device > Code generation> Specifies the names of the NVIDIA GPUs to generate code for and the class of the NVIDIA GPU architectures for which the input files must be compiled..

it specifies that Valid Values for each code are compute_20, compute_30, compute_35, compute_50, sm_20, sm_30, sm_35, sm_50

is there a more complete list ?? because when I look in the properties>Device>Code Generation :
I see compute_50,sm_50,compute_52,sm_52

where is the list of compute codes and their associated cards ??

[sp_]

Cuda 7.0 is not supported. Use cuda 6.5

[Nubminer]

Cuda 7.0 is not supported. Use cuda 6.5

no problem I dl 6.5 and tried to install... it said no compatible hardware found... i installed anyway..

now I get 41 errors when trying to compile.. 

I am sure I did something wrong here because if it can get messed up I will find a way to do just that.

[Nubminer]

I am very curious to see what changed between 50 and 51 for quark because 51 just does not hash as fast as 50 for me... by at least 500 h/s over time

[joblo]

Cuda 7.0 is not supported. Use cuda 6.5

no problem I dl 6.5 and tried to install... it said no compatible hardware found... i installed anyway..

now I get 41 errors when trying to compile.. 

I am sure I did something wrong here because if it can get messed up I will find a way to do just that.

No compatible hardware error is a driver installation issue. The cuda package include drivers but
they can, and should, be skipped during cuda installation. You probably already have a newer driver
that will get overwritten. In fact you can install cuda and compile ccminer without any GPU HW.

The compile problems and driver error are either not related or may have the same root cause.
If you have a compatible Nvidia GPU in your system and the driver install fails you should try
to fix that before trying anything with cuda.

Keep in mind I am also a newbie when it comes to compiling on Windows. If the procedure I posted
doesn't work I'm as lost as anyone.

[Nubminer]

You did AWESOME..!!!

 I tried this a couple of months ago and was getting the same errors and I thought I was told that I needed the Full version of VS and the community version would not be compatible... I don't have that kind of money so I gave up until I saw your post. (the last time I bought VS was when VB6 came out (yea i know I am older than dirt)

anyway I ended up changing to release x64 and got it to compile just fine.. it is running and stable.

I do have exactly the same results with v50 being 400+ h/s faster than 51 and I am now trying to side by side compare the differences just to reverse engineer this and find out why it is slower...

[joblo]

You did AWESOME..!!!

 I tried this a couple of months ago and was getting the same errors and I thought I was told that I needed the Full version of VS and the community version would not be compatible... I don't have that kind of money so I gave up until I saw your post. (the last time I bought VS was when VB6 came out (yea i know I am older than dirt)

anyway I ended up changing to release x64 and got it to compile just fine.. it is running and stable.

I do have exactly the same results with v50 being 400+ h/s faster than 51 and I am now trying to side by side compare the differences just to reverse engineer this and find out why it is slower...

That's curious. AFAIK changing the target architecture only affects the CPU code, not the Cuda code. If 64 works
but 32 doesn't there must be something messed up with your 32 bit environment, and it seems it's been that way
for a while.

[CapnBDL]

You did AWESOME..!!!

 I tried this a couple of months ago and was getting the same errors and I thought I was told that I needed the Full version of VS and the community version would not be compatible... I don't have that kind of money so I gave up until I saw your post. (the last time I bought VS was when VB6 came out (yea i know I am older than dirt)

anyway I ended up changing to release x64 and got it to compile just fine.. it is running and stable.

I do have exactly the same results with v50 being 400+ h/s faster than 51 and I am now trying to side by side compare the differences just to reverse engineer this and find out why it is slower...

That's curious. AFAIK changing the target architecture only affects the CPU code, not the Cuda code. If 64 works
but 32 doesn't there must be something messed up with your 32 bit environment, and it seems it's been that way
for a while.

As far as trying to reverse engineer this....ya really can't improve much on what sp_ has done. He, and the gang, are the best. I just test the product and let them figure it out. Just sayin....   Current code for blake mining returns the mining error...  H-not-zero.  Work on that.

[chrysophylax]

You did AWESOME..!!!

 I tried this a couple of months ago and was getting the same errors and I thought I was told that I needed the Full version of VS and the community version would not be compatible... I don't have that kind of money so I gave up until I saw your post. (the last time I bought VS was when VB6 came out (yea i know I am older than dirt)

anyway I ended up changing to release x64 and got it to compile just fine.. it is running and stable.

I do have exactly the same results with v50 being 400+ h/s faster than 51 and I am now trying to side by side compare the differences just to reverse engineer this and find out why it is slower...

That's curious. AFAIK changing the target architecture only affects the CPU code, not the Cuda code. If 64 works
but 32 doesn't there must be something messed up with your 32 bit environment, and it seems it's been that way
for a while.

As far as trying to reverse engineer this....ya really can't improve much on what sp_ has done. He, and the gang, are the best. I just test the product and let them figure it out. Just sayin....   Current code for blake mining returns the mining error...  H-not-zero.  Work on that.

just out from left field here ...

siacoin is going to be released in a few days - and works off blake2b algo ...

any chance we could get that in also to mine sia? ...

#crysx

[joblo]

You did AWESOME..!!!

 I tried this a couple of months ago and was getting the same errors and I thought I was told that I needed the Full version of VS and the community version would not be compatible... I don't have that kind of money so I gave up until I saw your post. (the last time I bought VS was when VB6 came out (yea i know I am older than dirt)

anyway I ended up changing to release x64 and got it to compile just fine.. it is running and stable.

I do have exactly the same results with v50 being 400+ h/s faster than 51 and I am now trying to side by side compare the differences just to reverse engineer this and find out why it is slower...

That's curious. AFAIK changing the target architecture only affects the CPU code, not the Cuda code. If 64 works
but 32 doesn't there must be something messed up with your 32 bit environment, and it seems it's been that way
for a while.

As far as trying to reverse engineer this....ya really can't improve much on what sp_ has done. He, and the gang, are the best. I just test the product and let them figure it out. Just sayin....   Current code for blake mining returns the mining error...  H-not-zero.  Work on that.

just out from left field here ...

siacoin is going to be released in a few days - and works off blake2b algo ...

any chance we could get that in also to mine sia? ...

#crysx

CapnBDL,

I think you quoted the wrong conversation, but no matter.

The point I was trying to make to you is that you should moderate your expectations regarding new
algos that have similar names as existing ones. They may not be as similar as they may seem and may
require significant development to implement. It's more like a new feature than a bug fix.

[Nubminer]

You did AWESOME..!!!

 I tried this a couple of months ago and was getting the same errors and I thought I was told that I needed the Full version of VS and the community version would not be compatible... I don't have that kind of money so I gave up until I saw your post. (the last time I bought VS was when VB6 came out (yea i know I am older than dirt)

anyway I ended up changing to release x64 and got it to compile just fine.. it is running and stable.

I do have exactly the same results with v50 being 400+ h/s faster than 51 and I am now trying to side by side compare the differences just to reverse engineer this and find out why it is slower...

That's curious. AFAIK changing the target architecture only affects the CPU code, not the Cuda code. If 64 works
but 32 doesn't there must be something messed up with your 32 bit environment, and it seems it's been that way
for a while.

As far as trying to reverse engineer this....ya really can't improve much on what sp_ has done. He, and the gang, are the best. I just test the product and let them figure it out. Just sayin....   Current code for blake mining returns the mining error...  H-not-zero.  Work on that.

I couldn't even fathom trying to improve what they have done... I am just curious as to why v51 that should be faster for quark is considerably slower on my cards.
And I don't expect anybody to do it for me so I figure I would at least make a vain attempt at it..

[joblo]

I am just curious as to why v51 that should be faster for quark is considerably slower on my cards.

Are they built the same? IIRC 32 bit builds perform better than 64, and cuda 6.5 performs better
than 7. Also are they generating code for the same compute versions? Do you get the same results
with the pre-built binaries?