CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded GPU kernels.

[Newton90]

can someone make this work on other pools ?

yeah,really need.

[agente]

can someone make this work on other pools ?

i have 650 h/s on a gtx g1 gaming
with ewbf 460 h/s

core +100 mem +700 , tdp 80%

https://github.com/palginpav/ccminer/releases/tag/2.1-equihash_test

the third one (v3)

it works on zpool and yimp
but on nicehash and flypool it says failed to get extranonce .

Fake speed. Dev updated his thread

[palgin]

Fake speed. Dev updated his thread

Sorry, comrades, while v1 is still a bit fasted than EWBF's version, stability is a shit. DjeZo pointed that I'm going the wrong way, so I decided to rewrite equi kernel from scratch and without any obligatory licenses 
Maybe rewrite miner code too to get rid of licensing issues, but all that needs time and I don't want to waste my vacation trip for this, hope you understand. I'll try to keep my thread updated, anyway.

[ocminer]

can someone make this work on other pools ?

yeah,really need.

Works on Suprnova now (ZEC and KMD) - I'll update the rest as well.

The ccminer variant works on a special port.

[bensam1231]

can someone make this work on other pools ?

yeah,really need.

Works on Suprnova now (ZEC and KMD) - I'll update the rest as well.

The ccminer variant works on a special port.

According to the responses he got in his thread, the speed upgrade isn't legitimate. It's based on a technique that yields less work pool side. Is that correct?

[ocminer]

can someone make this work on other pools ?

yeah,really need.

Works on Suprnova now (ZEC and KMD) - I'll update the rest as well.

The ccminer variant works on a special port.

According to the responses he got in his thread, the speed upgrade isn't legitimate. It's based on a technique that yields less work pool side. Is that correct?

I did not run his binary version (I never run any binarys from unknown sources, especially when it comes to crypto ) and cannot speak for "his" version - but tpruvot's version (compiled from tpruvot's source) is legit:

[scryptr]

can someone make this work on other pools ?

yeah,really need.

Works on Suprnova now (ZEC and KMD) - I'll update the rest as well.

The ccminer variant works on a special port.

According to the responses he got in his thread, the speed upgrade isn't legitimate. It's based on a technique that yields less work pool side. Is that correct?

PALGIN HAS SHELVED THE PROJECT--

He withdrew the binaries from his GitHub after a discussion with djeZo (an author).  Apparently his optimization strategy was a dead-end previously visited by djeZo, and known by djeZo to produce false local hashhates.  The code was unstable for me and others, Palgin may have a personal version that is stable on his rig(s).

In contrast, Palgin's CCminer 2.1 v3 reported locally about 150Sols/s on a GTX 960, but crashed almost immediately.  Excavator v1.1 from the NiceHash GitHub hashes at 130Sols/s at the local console, and the hashrate is verified by the pool (YIIMP).  Pool hashrate is based on submitted shares, often it is reported higher than the console hashrate.       --scryptr

[minerx117]

ccminer-equihash tpruvot source code compiled by me:

Source Code: https://github.com/tpruvot/ccminer/tree/equihash

Windows Binary:  https://mega.nz/#F!hi4SUIrY!hqSSsMxCgXDJ_FjlgpDYNw

X64 Release compile from tpruvot source with vs2013 cuda 8.0 for compute 3.0-5.2

tested on gtx 1060 & 1070 100% stable no crashes

Best Regards
#Nemo

[Dr_Victor]

ccminer-equihash tpruvot source code compiled by me:

Source Code: https://github.com/tpruvot/ccminer/tree/equihash

Windows Binary:  https://mega.nz/#F!hi4SUIrY!hqSSsMxCgXDJ_FjlgpDYNw

X64 Release compile from tpruvot source with vs2013 cuda 8.0 for compute 3.0-5.2

tested on gtx 1060 & 1070 100% stable no crashes

Best Regards
#Nemo

What about speed? 300&440?

[szafa]

I bought another gpu to minning.

[Amph]

ccminer-equihash tpruvot source code compiled by me:

Source Code: https://github.com/tpruvot/ccminer/tree/equihash

Windows Binary:  https://mega.nz/#F!hi4SUIrY!hqSSsMxCgXDJ_FjlgpDYNw

X64 Release compile from tpruvot source with vs2013 cuda 8.0 for compute 3.0-5.2

tested on gtx 1060 & 1070 100% stable no crashes

Best Regards
#Nemo

seems that epsylon is not aware thta JHA is broken in his last version, i get memory errors when i try to use it

[Epsylon3]

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/whiner

[Amph]

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/whiner

that is something that belong to you, since you were the first one to ignore me, ignoring someone else is childish in my view

[sp_]

Epsylon3 has been busy with alot of nice opensource commit's lately, but Custumer Satisfaction is not his priority right now...

[bensam1231]

Yeah, seems someone pissed in Epsy's cheerios lately.


In other news, if you're looking to buy 1080s, don't get MSI Duke's. It seems like their coolers would be superb, but they aren't. MSI white coolers are terrible, their reds only barely cool 1070s (Asus, Evga, and Zotac triples all are better). The Duke cooler is huge and while it does cool better then their reds, it still is inferior to the other brands I already mentioned.

MSI coolers definitely don't cut it at higher TDPs. Much like the Zotac AMP! (with the double fan cooler), they decided to wrap the entire side of the card. While this looks great it leaves absolutely no room for air to escape. The majority of the air will try to escape from both ends of the card even though the fins aren't aligned horizontally. This is another design oversight. While the fins on the red cards are oriented horizontally, they're changed to a vertical position with the Duke. For reference Asus and EVGA orient their fins vertically. This means the air has to pass over less fins before it's exhausted resulting in much better cooling and much less pressure being needed to move air through the fins. While they changed this with the Duke they neglected to remove the extra shit from the sides of the card where the fins want to exhaust (look at the edges on Newegg pictures and compare them to Asus and EVGA). The edges are wrapped tight as a nuns knickers. It's like attempting to blow a bunch of air into a bottle, there is no where for it to go. Really, a very silly oversight.

Zotac for instance fixed this between their AMP! 1070 two fan and their three fan. After I made a tough critique on it both here and on Newegg the design was changed and the three fan models cool much better simply by having the edges trimmed to half their normal overhang.

Despite the size of the Duke the cooling isn't really that much better then the reds (also despite what their website says about it being a great cooler for harsh environments). Kinda shitty, MSI seems to make quality cards. I've never once had one of their fans die and besides the initial reliability issues with their 1070s I haven't had many burn outs, but simple testing either internally or against their competitors would easily show that their cooling solution is inferior. Even though they're huge and it seems like what you would consider to be a great cooler stay away from these cards for mining.

[Epsylon3]

I dont have "customers", and if i had i would refuse Amph directly

Don't buy MSI at all for mining, they are cute but inefficient and they reject directly all customer RMA requests if you have a problem. I would say the same about the Gigabyte G1 series efficiency, they are wasting watts by default.

Could be different in the US though (the RMA, cf gpushack)

vertical orientation on heatsinks is only good for open rigs... not for a desktop. About that, not all fans like to be used vertically, some will fail early.

And yes im grumpy because i hate this equihash world, full of dev fees and which almost left the opensource system... I'm trying to fix that.. but im not motivated at all by the community this time...

[Amph]

despite your hate towards me i'm still mining at your pool, i have no grudge toward you, maybe your should improve yourself other than the miner  

[bensam1231]

I dont have "customers", and if i had i would refuse Amph directly

Don't buy MSI at all for mining, they are cute but inefficient and they reject directly all customer RMA requests if you have a problem. I would say the same about the Gigabyte G1 series efficiency, they are wasting watts by default.

Could be different in the US though (the RMA, cf gpushack)

vertical orientation on heatsinks is only good for open rigs... not for a desktop. About that, not all fans like to be used vertically, some will fail early.

And yes im grumpy because i hate this equihash world, full of dev fees and which almost left the opensource system... I'm trying to fix that.. but im not motivated at all by the community this time...

Vertical orientation is the direction of the fins on the card versus horizontal, doesn't have anything to do with the direction in which the card is in your case.

[Epsylon3]

you talk like djm lol

[mrada1204]

hello everyone ,

nvidia volta appeared , and maybe we`ll see the new cards by christmas

i`m courious to see first mining rigs build on new arhitecture (nvlink vs pcie ) any thoughts ?

performance of v100 seems to be 4x gtx 1060 ...and that is on one single card

http://www.pcworld.com/article/3196026/components-graphics/nvidias-monstrous-volta-gpu-appears-packed-with-21-billion-transistors-and-5120-cores.html

https://www.nvidia.com/en-us/data-center/volta-gpu-architecture/?ncid=van-volta-gpu-architecture

http://wccftech.com/nvidia-volta-gv100-gpu-tesla-v100-architecture-specifications-deep-dive/