Pages:
Author

Topic: 3% faster mining with phoenix+phatk for everyone - page 7. (Read 36831 times)

newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
Thanks for your code. It's nice to see people get rewarded for their efforts (though it doesn't always happen). Well, I've tried it on my own miner (minerd) and have some very strange findings.

https://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=21275.0

First of all, minerd supports up to 4 vectors, and when I add this change to my kernel, it actually _slows down_ the 4 vector version. But when I override it to set 2 vectors, it speeds it up. However, once it's sped up, I then get runs of rejected shares. I tried it multiple times with and without and it does appear to be just this change that causes it, so I'm not sure what's going on.

I honestly do not know what's up with that, I saw ATI asm yesterday for the first time and can't tell you exactly what's wrong yet. All I know is that the truth tables match for the Ma() function with and without my modifications. Yet, here's a couple of ideas -
1 glancing through the doc, radeons are VLIW5 = 4+1, with 4 'normal' pipelines and one transcendental pipe, which can do a restricted set of instructions. I don't know where BFI_INT gets executed, but if it is only in the trans. pipe, then doing too many BFI's can hurt the performance by making that pipe a bottleneck. Check the docs and let us know, if you don't mind.
2 if (z^x) isn't already used in other places in your code, then it may be pushing up the register usage and you're running less threads in parallel. Again, I don't know much about ATI, but it would be the first thing I'd check if we were on nVidia/CUDA.
3 something else altogether...

Not sure. Sorry. If I think of anything else, I'll post it Smiley In the meantime, it would also suck if people started getting more rejected shares... hmmm. I don't, it does work for me, but I encourage everyone to check their results (the actual amount of accepted shares that they get).
newbie
Activity: 12
Merit: 0
cool, will try these method
newbie
Activity: 55
Merit: 0
It's good to know that helps fellow miners, yet i get 16-20 mh\s more with that. http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=19051.0. All that is going on Powercolor 5770 @ 990/171 with -f 1 and -f 20 on win 7 x64. Anyway keep up the good work. We all need optimisations Smiley
full member
Activity: 130
Merit: 100
This works great !!! got an extra 100 MH with all my cards combined. I'm very grateful for this but this is definitely gonna push the difficulty up when this gets more public.

Worth a donation definitely!

6870 295mh => 312mh
5850 350mh => 362mh
6870 411mh => 426mh

Again great find.
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
 Very nice hack, gives me 2% to 3% more on HD5850/30.

Great find!   Smiley
newbie
Activity: 62
Merit: 0
works perfectly. Many thanks!!!
jr. member
Activity: 56
Merit: 1

5770 from ~200 to ~210 Smiley

Same with me!

Edited BitcoinMiner.cl on poclbm.
t3h
newbie
Activity: 19
Merit: 0
Wasn't the claimed improvement with hdminer 5% anyway? I wonder if Phoenix is now faster than hdminer... or was it before anyway?

5770 from ~200 to ~210 Smiley
newbie
Activity: 38
Merit: 0
Thank you! Works great!
-ck
legendary
Activity: 4088
Merit: 1631
Ruu \o/
Thanks for your code. It's nice to see people get rewarded for their efforts (though it doesn't always happen). Well, I've tried it on my own miner (minerd) and have some very strange findings.

https://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=21275.0

First of all, minerd supports up to 4 vectors, and when I add this change to my kernel, it actually _slows down_ the 4 vector version. But when I override it to set 2 vectors, it speeds it up. However, once it's sped up, I then get runs of rejected shares. I tried it multiple times with and without and it does appear to be just this change that causes it, so I'm not sure what's going on.
Crs
member
Activity: 107
Merit: 10
Works for me too.
I have two 5850s:

bitcoin0
[27/06/2011 12:38:36] Result: 09c2f420 accepted
[330.86 Mhash/sec] [38843 Accepted] [992 Rejected] [RPC]nmc@nmcpc:~$
new bitcoin0
[27/06/2011 12:43:09] Result: 805929c4 accepted
[340.86 Mhash/sec] [4 Accepted] [0 Rejected] [RPC]nmc@nmcpc:~/phoenix$

bitcoin1
[27/06/2011 12:38:45] Result: d593d475 accepted
[27/06/2011 12:38:49] Result: f23c0c10 accepted
[332.14 Mhash/sec] [39162 Accepted] [970 Rejected] [RPC]nmc@nmcpc:~$
new bitcoin1
[27/06/2011 12:43:45] Result: 7b29a04b accepted
[342.27 Mhash/sec] [11 Accepted] [0 Rejected] [RPC]nmc@nmcpc:~/phoenix$

Thanks for sharing this!
member
Activity: 78
Merit: 10
From 339.7MH -> 351.7MH (+3.5%) on my 6950@860 using Guiminer (poclbm).

Very nice find, bitless. Donation on it's way  Smiley
newbie
Activity: 17
Merit: 0
Thanks so much for sharing!

I only got about 2% increase, but hey, thats pretty good for 30 seconds work Smiley
donator
Activity: 1654
Merit: 1351
Creator of Litecoin. Cryptocurrency enthusiast.
Worked for me. 380 -> 392 (3.16%)
Thanks. This is worth donating for!
newbie
Activity: 28
Merit: 0
So bitless, how far are you in Computer Science?

Naukop - Could the drop in the hashrate be due to overheating? I've noticed that my card heats up more as a result of the change (and then either it hangs or I have to overclock it less Sad ), so could the same be happening to you?

Opsamk - m.sc., then asm programming for 10 years or so; i'm not looking to be-rich myself on bitcoins, just playing around with these hashes and ATI's hardware Smiley
full member
Activity: 122
Merit: 100
So bitless, how far are you in Computer Science?
newbie
Activity: 9
Merit: 0
Went from 193.7Mh/s to 195.1Mh/s on my 5770 (900/600) after I edited BitcoinMiner.cl and restarted guiminer.

 running guiminer phoenix.exe VECTORS BFI_INT FASTLOOP=false AGGRESSION=12 -k phatk WORKSIZE=128

Hmm, but now has rate has actually dropped into 186-188 range, not sure what is going on. Sad

full member
Activity: 196
Merit: 100
Thanks, donation send, I got a total of about 100 MH/s from all my rigs, works as advertised.
sr. member
Activity: 418
Merit: 250
2.6% increase on Phoenix' poclbm kernel. Nice work!

I wasn't aware that poclbm supported BFI_INT ?

Why not use PhatK with the 2.4 Stream SDK ?
brand new
Activity: 0
Merit: 0
you are my hero!
5850 (910,300) from 359 to 367
5870 (995, 300)  from 427.85 to 437
5870 (1000,300) from 440 to 449
Pages:
Jump to: