CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded GPU kernels.

[AliMan]

Anyone mining ETH on W10 getting any good hash, not sure if SP's miner solved the problem?

CCMINER DOES NOT MINE ETH--

Genoil's miner, a CUDA coded miner, mines ETH.  If you search CryptoMining-Blog.com, you will find the latest release.  Genoil and sp_ have collaborated, but the CUDA Ethminer is Genoil's.

Win 10 is reportedly bad for Ethminer performance on nVidia cards.  One miner keeps touting a specific nVidia driver for Ethminer and Win 10, but he may be trolling.

 I have no Win 10 rigs.       --scryptr

Alright, thanks buddy.

[Vaccomondus]

how to mine blake2s?

tpruvot's CPUMiner-multi has it implemented, though it says it is untested in the read me.

i mean with gpu, it's pointless with cpu if you don't have a cpu farm and none has it

[tbearhere]

Sp-mod decred private 1 is doing 600mhash @1405 core. 1.7.4 opensource is doing 550 on the same card and clock. Both compiled with cuda 7.5.

Only 0.1 btc guys

I get 1405 Mh/s per 970 and 495 Mh/s per 750 Ti with 1.7.4 with OC. I have no idea how others get 550.

If I was mining Decred I might buy it but I'm not. Eth is much more profitable and uses about 15-20% less electricity.

bathrobehero    Try 64x not 86x you should get 512 mh/s.

[bathrobehero]

Sp-mod decred private 1 is doing 600mhash @1405 core. 1.7.4 opensource is doing 550 on the same card and clock. Both compiled with cuda 7.5.

Only 0.1 btc guys

I get 1405 Mh/s per 970 and 495 Mh/s per 750 Ti with 1.7.4 with OC. I have no idea how others get 550.

If I was mining Decred I might buy it but I'm not. Eth is much more profitable and uses about 15-20% less electricity.

bathrobehero    Try 64x not 86x you should get 512 mh/s.

Thanks, tried that and I figured it out that I can get close to 500 Mh/s (still not over, with OC) if I only run 1 card.
With more cards I assume I run into some kind of CPU bottleneck with a dualcore pentium even though it's only at about 27%.

[tbearhere]

Sp-mod decred private 1 is doing 600mhash @1405 core. 1.7.4 opensource is doing 550 on the same card and clock. Both compiled with cuda 7.5.

Only 0.1 btc guys

I get 1405 Mh/s per 970 and 495 Mh/s per 750 Ti with 1.7.4 with OC. I have no idea how others get 550.

If I was mining Decred I might buy it but I'm not. Eth is much more profitable and uses about 15-20% less electricity.

bathrobehero    Try 64x not 86x you should get 512 mh/s.

Thanks, tried that and I figured it out that I can get close to 500 Mh/s (still not over, with OC) if I only run 1 card.
With more cards I assume I run into some kind of CPU bottleneck with a dualcore pentium even though it's only at about 27%.

Funny because I get ~ 515 per card oc to 1345 and have the same type of cpu...running a 6 750ti rig.
I forgot.... add this    --cpu-priority 3   if I go to  --cpu-priority 5  I can't connect to my rig.
I'm getting  3,100 mh/s total.

[tbearhere]

Sp-mod decred private 1 is doing 600mhash @1405 core. (750ti)1.7.4 opensource is doing 550 on the same card and clock. Both compiled with cuda 7.5.

Only 0.1 btc guys

Sp what do you get at 1345 oc ?  I may contribute to your release.

[Genoil]

Genoli - Can't find your BTC address.

1Nu2fMCEBjmnLzqb8qUJpKgq5RoEWFhNcW thanks

[fenomenhaa]

@Sp with your private decred miner one of the card perform half,(5-6 card rigs)How possible to fix it? With tpruvot miner  no problem occurs.

[coinut]

having issues with your private decred miner sp

supanova

more rejects and more unstable on getwork
loads of rejects with stratum.. to the point that the worker gets disabled

tpruvot works fine with getwork

pool MN

about the same rejects as supa on getwork but lower reported hash
low rejects on stratum but reported hash rate always under reading. 3445mh/s local 2800mh/s pool side

back to tpruvots miner for now.

disappointed sp..


tried for many hours on pool Mn to get the hashrate to read the same as local, running one instance per worker then two and three.. no difference. also tried multiplying and dividing diff locally with no joy. hashrate barely ever touching 3000mh/s.




 

[sp_]

My fork was based on 1.7.3 wich have issues. I need to refork 1.7.4 and make a new build

[s7icky]

My fork was based on 1.7.3 wich have issues. I need to refork 1.7.4 and make a new build

but you sold it and knew it had issues? LOLOL money hungry asshole once again.

[sp_]

My fork was based on 1.7.3 wich have issues. I need to refork 1.7.4 and make a new build

but you sold it and knew it had issues? LOLOL money hungry asshole once again.

I have only modded the cuda code. My subscribers will get updates. Fixes where submitted in the stratum/c++ code afterwards(github)

[malekbaba]

My fork was based on 1.7.3 wich have issues. I need to refork 1.7.4 and make a new build

but you sold it and knew it had issues? LOLOL money hungry asshole once again.

I have only modded the cuda code. My subscribers will get updates. Fixes where submitted in the stratum/c++ code afterwards(github)

which algo work best for 750ti cards? Can you please tell us the hashes a 750ti can make with your miner for vanilla and decred?

[joblo]

My fork was based on 1.7.3 wich have issues. I need to refork 1.7.4 and make a new build

but you sold it and knew it had issues? LOLOL money hungry asshole once again.

I have only modded the cuda code. My subscribers will get updates. Fixes where submitted in the stratum/c++ code afterwards(github)

which algo work best for 750ti cards? Can you please tell us the hashes a 750ti can make with your miner for vanilla and decred?

On a normalised hashrate basis lyra2v2 performs better than most other algos compared to other maxwell cards.
That doesn't mean it's more profitable than other algos, it's just more profitable than other cards when mining lyra2v2.
I haven't compared vanilla or decred.

[bensam1231]

Yeah, similar issues with SP's private decred. I'm getting 100% accept with stratum. Getwork is still buggy, just like with Tpruvots.

Something I've been reading up, from the Suprnova thread on the Decred forums:

This is a confirmed bug in cgminer on windows. It affects all pools. This flags seem to help:

--no-submit-stale --scan-time 2 --queue 0

Unknown-work means you are sending work back to the pool that was never requested - thats why it gets rejected, on windows cgminer seems to wrong calculation of the hash sometimes which results in this behavior.

It will probably get fixed in one of the future releases, or simply try the flags above.

However, CCminer doesn't support any of the above options besides 'scan time', so you can't tweak the other two options.


Putting all of the issues with accepted shares aside. Does anyone have problems with the miner speed not matching pool speed? Tpruvot and SP's miner show 25% faster hashrate then the pool is showing, even with close to 100% accepted shares. The only place I've seen the pool speed show up correctly is yiimp. MNpool also has the same speed issue. This is averaged over about 24hours so it's not a outlier.


SP, not sure if you saw cryptominingblog today, but they were talking about improving performance by using compute 3.5, at least it works that way with Blake-14, have you tried it with Decred? I assume it may yield similar results as Decred also uses Blake.

http://cryptomining-blog.com/

[sp_]

Yeah, similar issues with SP's private decred. I'm getting 100% accept with stratum. Getwork is still buggy, just like with Tpruvots.

Something I've been reading up, from the Suprnova thread on the Decred forums:

This is a confirmed bug in cgminer on windows. It affects all pools. This flags seem to help:

--no-submit-stale --scan-time 2 --queue 0

Unknown-work means you are sending work back to the pool that was never requested - thats why it gets rejected, on windows cgminer seems to wrong calculation of the hash sometimes which results in this behavior.

It will probably get fixed in one of the future releases, or simply try the flags above.

However, CCminer doesn't support any of the above options besides 'scan time', so you can't tweak the other two options.


Putting all of the issues with accepted shares aside. Does anyone have problems with the miner speed not matching pool speed? Tpruvot and SP's miner show 25% faster hashrate then the pool is showing, even with close to 100% accepted shares. The only place I've seen the pool speed show up correctly is yiimp. MNpool also has the same speed issue. This is averaged over about 24hours so it's not a outlier.


SP, not sure if you saw cryptominingblog today, but they were talking about improving performance by using compute 3.5, at least it works that way with Blake-14, have you tried it with Decred? I assume it may yield similar results as Decred also uses Blake.

http://cryptomining-blog.com/

My kernal is compiled with cuda 7.5. Cuda 6.5 is 10% slower

[bensam1231]

Yeah, similar issues with SP's private decred. I'm getting 100% accept with stratum. Getwork is still buggy, just like with Tpruvots.

Something I've been reading up, from the Suprnova thread on the Decred forums:

This is a confirmed bug in cgminer on windows. It affects all pools. This flags seem to help:

--no-submit-stale --scan-time 2 --queue 0

Unknown-work means you are sending work back to the pool that was never requested - thats why it gets rejected, on windows cgminer seems to wrong calculation of the hash sometimes which results in this behavior.

It will probably get fixed in one of the future releases, or simply try the flags above.

However, CCminer doesn't support any of the above options besides 'scan time', so you can't tweak the other two options.


Putting all of the issues with accepted shares aside. Does anyone have problems with the miner speed not matching pool speed? Tpruvot and SP's miner show 25% faster hashrate then the pool is showing, even with close to 100% accepted shares. The only place I've seen the pool speed show up correctly is yiimp. MNpool also has the same speed issue. This is averaged over about 24hours so it's not a outlier.


SP, not sure if you saw cryptominingblog today, but they were talking about improving performance by using compute 3.5, at least it works that way with Blake-14, have you tried it with Decred? I assume it may yield similar results as Decred also uses Blake.

http://cryptomining-blog.com/

My kernal is compiled with cuda 7.5. Cuda 6.5 is 10% slower

Compute 3.5 on 6.5. You can read the post on the link.

We have compiled ccMiner 1.7.4 tpruvot’s fork Windows binary in a version with the optimal settings for mining Vanillacoin (VNL) on more recent Nvidia-based GPUs as suggested by Alexis Provos and with his performance optimizations as implemented by tpruvot in the latest code. This Windows binary is a 32-bit one compiled with CUDa 6.5 and only with Compute 3.5 support as apparently this provides the optimal performance at least on Maxwell-based Nvidia GPUs (Faster than using Compute 5.2 on them). Below you can also see a comparison that we did with Nvidia GeForce GTX 970 from Gigabyte (WF3OC) and a reference design Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti to see the difference in performance with the regular version when using CUDA 7.5 and Compute 5.2 and with the optimized CUDA 6.5 and Compute 3.5 version available for download below. Do note that although this binary will work with other algorithms as well as the Blake 256 8-rounds used by VanillaCoin it may not provide the optimal performance for other algorithms as it is targeted to provide the best VNL mining hashrate.

[sp_]

We have compiled ccMiner 1.7.4 tpruvot’s fork Windows binary in a version with the optimal settings for mining Vanillacoin (VNL) on more recent Nvidia-based GPUs as suggested by Alexis Provos and with his performance optimizations as implemented by tpruvot in the latest code. This Windows binary is a 32-bit one compiled with CUDa 6.5 and only with Compute 3.5 support as apparently this provides the optimal performance at least on Maxwell-based Nvidia GPUs (Faster than using Compute 5.2 on them). Below you can also see a comparison that we did with Nvidia GeForce GTX 970 from Gigabyte (WF3OC) and a reference design Gigabyte GTX 980 Ti to see the difference in performance with the regular version when using CUDA 7.5 and Compute 5.2 and with the optimized CUDA 6.5 and Compute 3.5 version available for download below. Do note that although this binary will work with other algorithms as well as the Blake 256 8-rounds used by VanillaCoin it may not provide the optimal performance for other algorithms as it is targeted to provide the best VNL mining hashrate.

This is interesting thanks for the tip. Never thought compute 3.5 could be bether. My kernal is tuned for compute 5.0  and cuda 7.5 32bit. I will be surpriced if it goes faster With compute 3.5, but Worth a try. But there is a difference between vanillacoin and decred...

(The article write 7% more hash with 12% more power. with compute 3.5)
(The decred sp-mod private #1 has 10-15% more hash with 0% more power)

[Vaccomondus]

this does not support blake2s?

[bensam1231]

So other people have about -25% speed consistently pool side compared to miners on Decred?

I understand there is variance, but this is consistently over days. I have about 98% accepted shares. Seems to be the same on both getwork and stratum.