CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded GPU kernels.

[sibisi666]

SP,    -b 0.0.0.0 q    doesn't work after 4 mins in this miner... also i am getting better hashrate, but with more power...so improvement can be achieved with OC only. others?

[bensam1231]

it's underperforming compared to this version, jesus you are not even able to read right, really a waste of time talking with you

and again with this "regurgitating" no sense, keep repeating it like a retard will not make it true

Compared to what version? SP already mentioned he's working on Pascal performance... we already know that, that's nothing new nor a 'down point'. A 10-15% improvement is under performing? And I have problems with reader comprehension?

You make it true every time you open your mouth, just like with the Ethereum fix, now believing there is a 1-2% improvement with cards, which was disproven before you even mentioned it... Now you're desperately trying to dance around the whole issue to make it seem like you're right.

"really a waste of time talking with you" Hey look, something I said about you weeks ago... Vomiting it back up. Only reason I took you off ignore is because you keep throwing inaccurate information around that completely muddles the conversation and confuses people that are talking in threads.

You want to be a big boy, grow the fuck up and fact check your information before you open your pie hole... And if it's something you can't prove or disprove, use some common sense and look at what information is available (like a vetted and well known developer like SP saying he's capable of doing something and has even shown that he has done it (such as like with Maxwell) and other well known members in the thread confirming what he's saying).

It doesn't matter what Pallas, Wolf, Epsylon, any other developers say in passing about a algo they think is maxed out. Just the same as if SP says 'well no one can improve Cryptonote' for example and Wolf says 'I am working on a kernel that improves things by 25%', I'll believe Wolf0 over SP. Developers aren't god, they all don't pull from the same collective knowledge. Each of them has their own unique take on coding and code things differently, improving things over each other or hitting brick walls and thinking 'that's all that can be done', then another comes along like Nanashi... for a algo we thought was maxed out and doubles the performance.

It honestly looks like you're confusing yourself. You don't even remember what you were talking about in your last response. Go back a page and reread what you already wrote and what I responded to.

[sp_]

SP,    -b 0.0.0.0 q    doesn't work after 4 mins in this miner... also i am getting better hashrate, but with more power...so improvement can be achieved with OC only. others?

remove the -b 0.0.0.0 q it has no effect.

If you run ccminer --benchmark it will exit after 4 minutes.

There is a bug in the intensity and dual intensity. The Gpu #0 intensity will not be set. I will fix in release #3.
What cards do you have?

[antantti]

#2 gave me some headroom to play with. My 8-pinners were at 165-170 area with #1, this one lets them do 175-180 before power limiters kick in.

[sibisi666]

SP,    -b 0.0.0.0 q    doesn't work after 4 mins in this miner... also i am getting better hashrate, but with more power...so improvement can be achieved with OC only. others?

remove the -b 0.0.0.0 q it has no effect.

If you run ccminer --benchmark it will exit after 4 minutes.

There is a bug in the intensity and dual intensity. The Gpu #0 intensity will not be set. I will fix in release #3.
What cards do you have?

i got 1070 gainward
i thought -b 0.0.0.0 q working in first 4 mins...after that i can see hashrate of each card in rig... I want to see only sum of hashrates not single card hash, thats why I was using -b 0.0.0.0 q
btw,
can you give us example for dual mining?
thanx

[Amph]

it's underperforming compared to this version, jesus you are not even able to read right, really a waste of time talking with you

and again with this "regurgitating" no sense, keep repeating it like a retard will not make it true

Compared to what version?

this current version that sp is releasing for fee + donation

[Epsylon3]

selling... not releasing

[sp_]

can you give us example for dual mining?
thanx

Run with f.ex -a lbry --dual 32 -i 20

And in the genoils ethminer .bat you add --cuda-schedule auto

Dual mining is under developement, and the --dual doesn't work properly in #2.   (cannot set intensities for card 0 in the rig., shedule flags are wrong. etc)
I will improve it in release #3

[Amph]

sp can you post screen about 1070 +5% boost, which would put a 1070 around 300 already

[sp_]

sp can you post screen about 1070 +5% boost, which would put a 1070 around 300 already

My card is trottleing at high speeds I only have a 8pin connector and no powered riser.
My kernal #2 does 293 at a 2100 core and -1000 on the memory (1400)(with nvidia inspector). Tdp changed with the nvidia-smi tool to 170 (limited in the bios) and p0 state.

Anybody know a good tool to reduce the memclock to 500 on the 1070?

[Nikolaj]

sp can you post screen about 1070 +5% boost, which would put a 1070 around 300 already

265 *1.05 = 278.25 (on average, not considering too high settings, that are simply useless in a multigpu environment given the absence of rock solid stability)

@bensam: you're not the only one with a "decent" amount invested in cryptos, but there's also a thing callededucation and mutual respect. I understand your frustration in such discussions, but it should be better if you both ignore each others; it's a nonsense to continue like this in every thread you both collide.

@sp: would you be so kind to post hashrates with a human, achievable, frequency? A common 1070, even custom, barely reaches 2000MHz in stability without thermal and power throttling (in a multigpu setup obviously, due thermal complications). Interesting findings about the memory controller btw. Have you measured the difference between the reference values (TDP 150) and  TDP to 170 + forced p0 state? Such tests would be much more interesting with watt measures. What's you model of 1070?

Thanks

[tbearhere]

I tested latest from sp_ factory with 8-pin 970 and I can confirm that there is no memory controller load anymore with lbry. That alone opens new possibilities for future development.

Bad news is that 8-pin card is so tdp limited that my tests were worth nothing.

Opensource with core@1500 and -i 25 does about 163MH, crashes with -i 26 or core@1520-1530. Hits tdpwall too.

sp_mod overclocks like beast, 1600 and way beyond but that doesn't help when power is limiting factor.

Conclusion: You need to have 8+6pin card or mod your bios. Waiting for dual miner.

What cpu do you have?  thx

[antantti]

I tested latest from sp_ factory with 8-pin 970 and I can confirm that there is no memory controller load anymore with lbry. That alone opens new possibilities for future development.

Bad news is that 8-pin card is so tdp limited that my tests were worth nothing.

Opensource with core@1500 and -i 25 does about 163MH, crashes with -i 26 or core@1520-1530. Hits tdpwall too.

sp_mod overclocks like beast, 1600 and way beyond but that doesn't help when power is limiting factor.

Conclusion: You need to have 8+6pin card or mod your bios. Waiting for dual miner.

What cpu do you have?  thx

4690k on that rig.

Latest sp-mod#2 does 175-180MH with tdp limited 8-pin card, I might start playing with bios if it is boring night in cryptoland.

[sp_]

More boost for 970 cards with LBRY sp-mod release #2

This is standard clocks on the

Galax GTX 970 HOF

Release #3 is up 3-4 MHASH(+2% from #2) and more stable output on the gtx 970 HOF standard clocks

[rednoW]

My card is trottleing at high speeds I only have a 8pin connector and no powered riser.
My kernal #2 does 293 at a 2100 core and -1000 on the memory (1400)(with nvidia inspector). Tdp changed with the nvidia-smi tool to 170 (limited in the bios) and p0 state.

Anybody know a good tool to reduce the memclock to 500 on the 1070?

Open source can do 190 with 2060 core. So your mod didn't do any better on pascal yet ...
You can increase TDP of your any 150 watt card if you flash bios with 170 watt (palit superjetstream bios for example).
Then with +114% in afterburner you'll get 190 watt. But I'm not sure that any other cards except zotac and palit have proper cooling for this.

[go6ooo1212]

@rednoW,
 you mean 290MH @2060MHz with Palit 1070 SJS , right ?

[rednoW]

@rednoW,
 you mean 290MH @2060MHz with Palit 1070 SJS , right ?

Sorry, I was wrong, just rechecked. It needs 2080-2090mhz to make 290mhs.

[go6ooo1212]

@rednoW,
 you mean 290MH @2060MHz with Palit 1070 SJS , right ?

Sorry, I was wrong, just rechecked. It needs 2080-2090mhz to make 290mhs.

It is legit to me , because I'm getting 285 MH from my 1070s Palit - SJS , without powertune above 100% and 6 cards on the rig ( open source miner)...
EDIT: Temperature 58-62 C degrees @ these settings

[bensam1231]

sp can you post screen about 1070 +5% boost, which would put a 1070 around 300 already

265 *1.05 = 278.25 (on average, not considering too high settings, that are simply useless in a multigpu environment given the absence of rock solid stability)

@bensam: you're not the only one with a "decent" amount invested in cryptos, but there's also a thing callededucation and mutual respect. I understand your frustration in such discussions, but it should be better if you both ignore each others; it's a nonsense to continue like this in every thread you both collide.

@sp: would you be so kind to post hashrates with a human, achievable, frequency? A common 1070, even custom, barely reaches 2000MHz in stability without thermal and power throttling (in a multigpu setup obviously, due thermal complications). Interesting findings about the memory controller btw. Have you measured the difference between the reference values (TDP 150) and  TDP to 170 + forced p0 state? Such tests would be much more interesting with watt measures. What's you model of 1070?

Thanks

Yeah, you have to act remotely intelligent to get respect, Amph acts intelligent and then just posts something you instantly corrected him on. That was what he 'regurgitated' from the guy a couple pages back posting his 280Mh/s 'normal' hashrates for Lbry, which all of us know is complete bullshit. If I could get 280Mh/s per card, I'd love that. Only way you get that is with a 2070Mhz overclock... which is extremely rare. Even my high end cards don't get that if I want to remain stable for 8+ hours.

I already put him on ignore, I had to take him off because he keeps posting misinformation like the above in threads. It derails the topic and spreads bullshit all around people end up believing 'cause the one guy in the thread said it'. Not only does it look bad for SP when he tries to sell his miner, it gives people a false impression of how much they can earn by mining Lbry for instance. That means he's LOSING PEOPLE MONEY. I don't know how lax you are with pissing away your money, but generally speaking... this is bad juju.

I don't know if he's intentionally being ignorant and a troll with malicious intent, but I can only assume so based on his behavior so I'm treating him that way.

My card is trottleing at high speeds I only have a 8pin connector and no powered riser.
My kernal #2 does 293 at a 2100 core and -1000 on the memory (1400)(with nvidia inspector). Tdp changed with the nvidia-smi tool to 170 (limited in the bios) and p0 state.

Anybody know a good tool to reduce the memclock to 500 on the 1070?

Open source can do 190 with 2060 core. So your mod didn't do any better on pascal yet ...
You can increase TDP of your any 150 watt card if you flash bios with 170 watt (palit superjetstream bios for example).
Then with +114% in afterburner you'll get 190 watt. But I'm not sure that any other cards except zotac and palit have proper cooling for this.

That's incorrect, I have two cards that run at 2063 doing 276Mhs... They have a TDP of 120 and never hit it to start throttling.

It's possible to flash your card to another manufacturers bios, I would definitely not suggest it though due to differences in fans and memory types.

I'm curious why everyone is quoting really high GPU speeds? Something say like 1950 is much more common. Fast overclocks are fast, almost no one will be able to hit them though.

[giagge]

This is my result with ccminer-rel1.8.1-vc2013



.