CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded GPU kernels.

[Amph]

My results on lbry.

750 ti with o/c :49-50 mh/s
970 with o/c  : 131-132mh/s
1070  with o/c (2000mhz core):222-224mh/s  

7970-280x o/c : 50-51mh/s
290 with oc     :66 -67 mh/s

what is your usage on the 1070? 99%?

Nvidia seems good!
What miner are you using for Nvidia cards?

there is no open source for nvidia yet, so i guess he is using the private one

1070 @ %94-95 it seems possible to improvee.Sure private miner.

5% missed mean that it can reach 240MH, good enough for me

[bensam1231]

GTX 1070 is 5.25GH/s on XVC (Blake-256 8 round), pulling 150W - this gives it a MH/s/W value of 35MH/s/W.

I'd like to stress that it's 14nm. With my full-custom design on one of my 28nm FPGAs, I get 2.1GH/s at 24W - this gives it an MH/s/W value of 87.5MH/s/W.

As it is, this fight is one-sided. If they had been manufactured on the same node, it wouldn't be a fight - it would be an execution.

well not fair to compare a gpu with fpga, fpga can do well one thing at time, then you need to reprogram it, gpu can do multiple things

it will consume more energy because of that, if gpu were specialized only on mining, they would be just asic, so yes it's not all about nm productive process

Yeah, but my point was, from a mining perspective, a GPU and an FPGA can both mine many algos. The FPGA may be somewhat more restricted in selection, but it can still switch. So comparing raw hash/watt as a measure of merit is faulty, unless what I pointed out holds as well.

FPGAs are in a completely different class... You could lump ASICs into that comparison too. They also can mine multiple algos... They just have to be built from the ground up each and every time. To that extent, so do miners for GPUs (depending on how different the algo is from other ones already made), but the time requirement is quite a bit different.

ASICs can't mine multiple algos unless they're made to from the start. You can buy an FPGA ONCE and reprogram it - a GPU is closer to this. You don't have to get a new GPU every algo.

Sure, but often times you have to completely reprogram the thing from the ground up. They're both in a different class of products from GPUs.

You do realize GPUs are pretty much the same, except they expose an instruction set, correct?

Something about memory, horsepower too (computational units), instruction sets they support, and operating environment. Even if you can do one thing really well with a FPGA (much like a ASIC), that doesn't mean it'll do everything else pretty much equally as ewll. There is a reason FPGAs have always been the stepping stone to ASICs. Because if you're going to take enough time to program for a FPGA, you can just take that one step further and start designing the chip too, which adds a lot more flexibility when it comes to efficiency and raw horsepower (more of whatever you need to produce a certain amount of hashrate, less of whatever isn't being used) and allows your clientele to easily implement them (a box you plug in). The level of expertise you need for each of those goes up quite a bit hoping from GPU > FPGA > ASIC.

Like I said, there is pretty much three classes, GPUs, ASICs, and FPGAs. FPGAs are like the experimentation ground for ASICs. There are CPUs too, but GPUs can do almost everything CPUs can better, especially when it comes to cryptos.

Of course it won't do everything equally as well. You're totally missing the point - you don't need to buy another GPU for an algo, you don't need to buy another FPGA for an algo, you DO need another ASIC for one. FPGAs have memory, plenty more horsepower depending on the task, and if you makes you happy, you can make them accept instructions to perform tasks, as well.

Yeah, and I'm taking it one step further and looking at the software side as well as hardware.

Lets say a new algo comes out. Is it just as easy to update a FPGA as it is ccminer to mine it? The answer is no. If it were, everyone would be using FPGAs instead of GPUs.

And yes, sometimes your FPGA can't handle a algo so you need a different make or model that has the assets you need (like memory).

[antantti]

My results on lbry.

750 ti with o/c :49-50 mh/s
970 with o/c  : 131-132mh/s
1070  with o/c (2000mhz core):222-224mh/s  

7970-280x o/c : 50-51mh/s
290 with oc     :66 -67 mh/s

Are you on windows?

Try to do something cpu intensive while mining. What happens to your hashrate? My 970's get a boost of 14% and hashrate goes up to 150Mh/s per card.

-edit- OT something wrong with your 290, should do at least 90Mh/s with public miner.

[Amph]

My results on lbry.

750 ti with o/c :49-50 mh/s
970 with o/c  : 131-132mh/s
1070  with o/c (2000mhz core):222-224mh/s  

7970-280x o/c : 50-51mh/s
290 with oc     :66 -67 mh/s

Are you on windows?

Try to do something cpu intensive while mining. What happens to your hashrate? My 970's get a boost of 14% and hashrate goes up to 150Mh/s per card.

-edit- OT something wrong with your 290, should do at least 90Mh/s with public miner.

does not make any sense that gpu make more hash when you use more the cpu with something else

[giagge]

Nvidia very good with LBRY and Siacoin .

[antantti]

My results on lbry.

750 ti with o/c :49-50 mh/s
970 with o/c  : 131-132mh/s
1070  with o/c (2000mhz core):222-224mh/s  

7970-280x o/c : 50-51mh/s
290 with oc     :66 -67 mh/s

Are you on windows?

Try to do something cpu intensive while mining. What happens to your hashrate? My 970's get a boost of 14% and hashrate goes up to 150Mh/s per card.

-edit- OT something wrong with your 290, should do at least 90Mh/s with public miner.

does not make any sense that gpu make more hash when you use more the cpu with soemthing else

I know, I have been trying to find out why for two days.

[bensam1231]

GTX 1070 is 5.25GH/s on XVC (Blake-256 8 round), pulling 150W - this gives it a MH/s/W value of 35MH/s/W.

I'd like to stress that it's 14nm. With my full-custom design on one of my 28nm FPGAs, I get 2.1GH/s at 24W - this gives it an MH/s/W value of 87.5MH/s/W.

As it is, this fight is one-sided. If they had been manufactured on the same node, it wouldn't be a fight - it would be an execution.

well not fair to compare a gpu with fpga, fpga can do well one thing at time, then you need to reprogram it, gpu can do multiple things

it will consume more energy because of that, if gpu were specialized only on mining, they would be just asic, so yes it's not all about nm productive process

Yeah, but my point was, from a mining perspective, a GPU and an FPGA can both mine many algos. The FPGA may be somewhat more restricted in selection, but it can still switch. So comparing raw hash/watt as a measure of merit is faulty, unless what I pointed out holds as well.

FPGAs are in a completely different class... You could lump ASICs into that comparison too. They also can mine multiple algos... They just have to be built from the ground up each and every time. To that extent, so do miners for GPUs (depending on how different the algo is from other ones already made), but the time requirement is quite a bit different.

ASICs can't mine multiple algos unless they're made to from the start. You can buy an FPGA ONCE and reprogram it - a GPU is closer to this. You don't have to get a new GPU every algo.

Sure, but often times you have to completely reprogram the thing from the ground up. They're both in a different class of products from GPUs.

You do realize GPUs are pretty much the same, except they expose an instruction set, correct?

Something about memory, horsepower too (computational units), instruction sets they support, and operating environment. Even if you can do one thing really well with a FPGA (much like a ASIC), that doesn't mean it'll do everything else pretty much equally as ewll. There is a reason FPGAs have always been the stepping stone to ASICs. Because if you're going to take enough time to program for a FPGA, you can just take that one step further and start designing the chip too, which adds a lot more flexibility when it comes to efficiency and raw horsepower (more of whatever you need to produce a certain amount of hashrate, less of whatever isn't being used) and allows your clientele to easily implement them (a box you plug in). The level of expertise you need for each of those goes up quite a bit hoping from GPU > FPGA > ASIC.

Like I said, there is pretty much three classes, GPUs, ASICs, and FPGAs. FPGAs are like the experimentation ground for ASICs. There are CPUs too, but GPUs can do almost everything CPUs can better, especially when it comes to cryptos.

Of course it won't do everything equally as well. You're totally missing the point - you don't need to buy another GPU for an algo, you don't need to buy another FPGA for an algo, you DO need another ASIC for one. FPGAs have memory, plenty more horsepower depending on the task, and if you makes you happy, you can make them accept instructions to perform tasks, as well.

Yeah, and I'm taking it one step further and looking at the software side as well as hardware.

Lets say a new algo comes out. Is it just as easy to update a FPGA as it is ccminer to mine it? The answer is no. If it were, everyone would be using FPGAs instead of GPUs.

And yes, sometimes your FPGA can't handle a algo so you need a different make or model that has the assets you need (like memory).

It's not JUST AS EASY - it's a different skillset. Again, you assume because you can't do something, it's a rare talent. And not if you put memory onboard. You can do this, you know.

...it is a rare talent. Hence why FPGAs aren't everywhere... XD Heart surgeon is just another skillset. 'Just because you can't do it, doesn't mean it's rare talent.'

Yeah, you can just add memory to your FPGA? Throw some GDDR5 chips or HBM on there for fun? You mean buy one with it already on it or build one from the ground up (which is no different from just building a ASIC).


Curiously could someone confirm the 'actual' rate from yiimp? It seems unlikely it's earning about 30% more per MH for Lbry then coinmine/mnpool/suprnova, basically every other pool.

[go6ooo1212]

My results on lbry.

750 ti with o/c :49-50 mh/s
970 with o/c  : 131-132mh/s
1070  with o/c (2000mhz core):222-224mh/s  

7970-280x o/c : 50-51mh/s
290 with oc     :66 -67 mh/s

Are you on windows?

Try to do something cpu intensive while mining. What happens to your hashrate? My 970's get a boost of 14% and hashrate goes up to 150Mh/s per card.

-edit- OT something wrong with your 290, should do at least 90Mh/s with public miner.

Which settings do you reach 150MH on 970s , mate ?

[pttx]

750ti oc 53mh/s
1070 oc 245mh/s
1080 oc 325mh/s

rx480 125mh/s

[trinityfl]

390x 175mh/s
rx480 125mh/s

how run rx480? under sg?

[antantti]

My results on lbry.

750 ti with o/c :49-50 mh/s
970 with o/c  : 131-132mh/s
1070  with o/c (2000mhz core):222-224mh/s  

7970-280x o/c : 50-51mh/s
290 with oc     :66 -67 mh/s

Are you on windows?

Try to do something cpu intensive while mining. What happens to your hashrate? My 970's get a boost of 14% and hashrate goes up to 150Mh/s per card.

-edit- OT something wrong with your 290, should do at least 90Mh/s with public miner.

Which settings do you reach 150MH on 970s , mate ?

Core ~1495, power limit as high as it goes, cpuminer with one thread running in the backround.

Gpu load 92-98%, mc load 24%, perfcap reason pwr.

[go6ooo1212]

My results on lbry.

750 ti with o/c :49-50 mh/s
970 with o/c  : 131-132mh/s
1070  with o/c (2000mhz core):222-224mh/s  

7970-280x o/c : 50-51mh/s
290 with oc     :66 -67 mh/s

Are you on windows?

Try to do something cpu intensive while mining. What happens to your hashrate? My 970's get a boost of 14% and hashrate goes up to 150Mh/s per card.

-edit- OT something wrong with your 290, should do at least 90Mh/s with public miner.

Which settings do you reach 150MH on 970s , mate ?

Core ~1495, power limit as high as it goes, cpuminer with one thread running in the backround.

Gpu load 92-98%, mc load 24%, perfcap reason pwr.

Thanks , but still can't figure how CPU miner affects the GPU miner , I have Intel XEON E3-1225 , which is quite good for tough work ... will try that scheme

[antantti]

My results on lbry.

750 ti with o/c :49-50 mh/s
970 with o/c  : 131-132mh/s
1070  with o/c (2000mhz core):222-224mh/s  

7970-280x o/c : 50-51mh/s
290 with oc     :66 -67 mh/s

Are you on windows?

Try to do something cpu intensive while mining. What happens to your hashrate? My 970's get a boost of 14% and hashrate goes up to 150Mh/s per card.

-edit- OT something wrong with your 290, should do at least 90Mh/s with public miner.

Which settings do you reach 150MH on 970s , mate ?

Core ~1495, power limit as high as it goes, cpuminer with one thread running in the backround.

Gpu load 92-98%, mc load 24%, perfcap reason pwr.

Thanks , but still can't figure how CPU miner affects the GPU miner , I have Intel XEON E3-1225 , which is quite good for tough work ... will try that scheme

It is a mystery for me too. I am running 4690k with that rig.

[go6ooo1212]

Are you fine setting the intensity of the miner ?

[antantti]

Are you fine setting the intensity of the miner ?

Let me see... no.

Are you running preview3?

[go6ooo1212]

Are you fine setting the intensity of the miner ?

Let me see... no.

Are you running preview3?

Idk what the preview3 actually is?

[antantti]

Are you fine setting the intensity of the miner ?

Let me see... no.

Are you running preview3?

Idk what the preview3 actually is?

Ok so what miner are you running?

[go6ooo1212]

..Actually I can't find CPU-miner assembly , only source in git...

[antantti]

..Actually I can't find CPU-miner assembly , only source in git...

Do something that stresses your cpu. It doesn't have to be cpu miner.

Went on and did some more testing. Two threads gives you 0.7% more.Three and down you go. This with i5 4690k.

[Amph]

750ti oc 53mh/s
1070 oc 245mh/s
1080 oc 325mh/s

rx480 125mh/s

what oc on the 1070 +400 on the core?