CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded GPU kernels.

[sp_]

x32 binary faster by 5% than x64 for my 1080 and ti. -i 25.6 for x32 and 26.6 for x64, geforce 1080 ti 56.85 mh (x64) and 60mh (x32)
upd: speed boost more visible with gtx1070 for me... 1080ti so little if compare 7 and 8 version. On multicard 1080ti rigs i don't see any difference, only with 2-3 cards.
P.S Win 10, latest drivers, VRAM 65 gb

geforce 1080 ti  60mh (-i 25.6)

60HASH has been reached with sp-mod #8 on the 1080ti.   good job

[Spl@sH]

Why LBC miner is not available now ?

[du44]

Why LBC miner is not available now ?

I'ts availible now, you can download for free from there:
https://github.com/sp-hash/ccminer/releases/tag/LBRYSP6

[Spl@sH]

Why LBC miner is not available now ?

I'ts availible now, you can download for free from there:
https://github.com/sp-hash/ccminer/releases/tag/LBRYSP6

Thanks 

[caozhengwei]

Why NXS power consumption is so high?Is there any way to reduce

[damniatx]

Why NXS power consumption is so high?Is there any way to reduce

how do you mine NXS ?, is it solo mining ?

[chup]

No, this predates far further back then that. Neither SP, nor Wolf0, nor Claymore, nor you suggested it first. It came about from a brainstorming session in this thread. Couple of us were BSing around with the idea of extra overhead available in Nvidia hardware due to its inefficiencies with memory hard algos.


That is about as far back as I care to dig. I definitely made posts on this in Genoil's thread on the Ethereum forums before that above snippet and it was discussed even further back in this thread predating Ethereum (specifically pertaining to NeoS and Monero). You can dig away.

At the time of mentioned conversation, Claymore dual miner already existed.

[sp_]

Thanks, i got the mail and i am testing #7.
Is there any dev fee in this version (#7) ?

There is no fee in signatum sp-mod. #8 should be faster than #7 on most setups.

[du44]

#8 should be faster than #7 on most setups.

#7 faster for 6 and more gpu rigs for me by 1%, 1070,  1080 ti with maximum intensity
#8 faster for 1-3 gpu PC's - don't know why but...

[damniatx]

Thanks, i got the mail and i am testing #7.
Is there any dev fee in this version (#7) ?

There is no fee in signatum sp-mod. #8 should be faster than #7 on most setups.

SP, why spmod 8 shows as a trojan on windows 10 ?, are you trying to do something with us ?

[sp_]

Thanks, i got the mail and i am testing #7.
Is there any dev fee in this version (#7) ?

There is no fee in signatum sp-mod. #8 should be faster than #7 on most setups.

SP, why spmod 8 shows as a trojan on windows 10 ?, are you trying to do something with us ?

Did you check the power usage? Perhaps the risers can't feed enough power in build #8.

[sp_]

SP, why spmod 8 shows as a trojan on windows 10 ?, are you trying to do something with us ?

My build is clean. Mining software  often get false positives in antivirus software.

[damniatx]

SP, why spmod 8 shows as a trojan on windows 10 ?, are you trying to do something with us ?

My build is clean. Mining software  often get false positives in antivirus software.

ok 

[sp_]

Todays winner is Signatum

Mine with sp-mod #8 private kernel. 60 MHASH on the 1080ti

(0.05BTC donation)

[xeridea]

Sigt #7 vs #8miner
1080 TI 56.25 vs 55.75    -i 25.5, some cards fail at 26
1080 41.8 vs 41.8
1070 31.1 vs 31.4
1060 3GB 19.3 vs 19.55

100% power, +75-100 core, -502 mem, -i 25. 64 bit always slower.

Slightly faster. How people getting 60MH on 1080TI? I have EVGA cards, set power to 107%, clocks 1911-1999MHz.  Not sure about 33MH on 1070 either. Installed latest drivers few days ago.

[sp_]

Did you install the 385.28 driver (release date 2017.8.14)? #8 has a reported slower speed on the 1080ti if you use 6 cards in the rig.
1-3 cards ok.

[sp_]

Sigt #8 vs #7miner
1080 TI 56.25 vs 55.75    -i 25.5, some cards fail at 26
1080 41.8 vs 41.8
1070 31.1 vs 31.4
1060 3GB 19.3 vs 19.55

100% power, +75-100 core, -502 mem, -i 25. 64 bit always slower.

Slightly faster. How people getting 60MH on 1080TI? I have EVGA cards, set power to 107%, clocks 1911-1999MHz.  Not sure about 33MH on 1070 either. Installed latest drivers few days ago.

Sigt #7 vs OS miner
1080 TI 54.5 vs 54
1080 41.8 vs 41
1070 31.1 vs 30?
1060 3GB 19.3 vs 17.8

100% power, +75-100 core, -502 mem.
Big win for 1060 3gb, decent for others.

Edit, set -i 25.5 on 1080 TI, now get 55.75.  Can't use on other cards, get OOM error.

I think you swapped some numbers.

Sigt #8 vs #7miner
1080 TI 56.25 vs 55.75    -i 25.5, some cards fail at 26
1080 41.8 vs 41.8
1070 31.4 vs 31.1
1060 3GB 19.55 vs 19.3

Sp-mod #8 compared to the OS miner:

1080ti: +4.16%
1080: +1.195%
1070: +4.66%
1060 3gb: +13%

[sp_]

Slightly faster. How people getting 60MH on 1080TI?

Probobly samsung memory. Do your cards have Hynix mem? (you can check in gpuz)

[sp_]

@sp

Hi there, CAN YOU PLEASE LET US USE CWI POOL. THANKS.

Can you take screenshot of the error message please... 

[bensam1231]

No, this predates far further back then that. Neither SP, nor Wolf0, nor Claymore, nor you suggested it first. It came about from a brainstorming session in this thread. Couple of us were BSing around with the idea of extra overhead available in Nvidia hardware due to its inefficiencies with memory hard algos.


That is about as far back as I care to dig. I definitely made posts on this in Genoil's thread on the Ethereum forums before that above snippet and it was discussed even further back in this thread predating Ethereum (specifically pertaining to NeoS and Monero). You can dig away.

At the time of mentioned conversation, Claymore dual miner already existed.

The conversation was in relation to a conversation regarding adding dual mining support on Nvidia, it predated the original post I quoted who was claiming dual mining was something he thought up. As I mentioned, if you want to dig further you'll find my original replies in Genoils miner thread on the Ethereum forums and dig even deeper in this thread you'll find a discussion surrounding using a memory intensive algo along with a GPU compute intensive one in this specific thread while talking about NeoS. NeoScrypt has been around since 2014.

20 minutes looking for that reply just to disprove the original premise of the statement for both posters was all I was looking for. If you want to dig to the core of the idea it's going to take a lot more thread searching, but I guarantee you it didn't originate from SP, Claymore, Wolf0, randoguy223 on the forums. I am definitely one of the original contributors to that conversation, but I really don't give enough of a shit over epeen prestige here to warrant a two hour long post searching quest. So I settled on 20 minutes.