[ANN] cudaMiner & ccMiner CUDA based mining applications [Windows/Linux/MacOSX] - page 1009.

RbelMonstr

member

Activity: 79

Merit: 10

Quote from: sairon on January 15, 2014, 06:08:07 AM

Hi there! Can you please plug your figures into this table for nvidia performance?

http://yacoinwiki.tk/index.php/Mining_Hardware_Comparison

There is a survey/spreadsheet combo for Scrypt-Jane a few pages back, you could get your data from there.
And in the OP there are also 2 spreadsheets.

sairon

sr. member

Activity: 406

Merit: 250

One does not simply mine Bitcoins

Hi there! Can you please plug your figures into this table for nvidia performance?

http://yacoinwiki.tk/index.php/Mining_Hardware_Comparison

Lionel

sr. member

Activity: 613

Merit: 305

Quote from: Tweek on January 14, 2014, 05:03:44 PM

Quote from: Lionel on January 14, 2014, 03:37:38 PM

Quote from: Tweek on January 14, 2014, 09:21:19 AM

Quote from: Lionel on January 14, 2014, 07:36:56 AM

Guys let's try playing games while mining with cuda!
Try adding this options and let me know if the game lags

-i 1 -l S2x1

If the game lags try with

-i 1 -l S1x1

Lemme know

Lol that hashrate... 3.8kh/s while my 670 does 240kh/s on my own settings

too low you're right

try with these ones
-i 1 -l S3x3
-i 1 -l S5x5
-i 1 -l S6x6

should give a decent Kh/s while gaming,
for me
20Kh/s
40Kh/s
50Kh/s

and you? I have to try more aggressive configs

For gaming I use
-i 1 -l K8x2 = 55kh/s and game (guild wars 2) feels a little laggy with ~15fps
-i 1 -l K6x2 = 40kh/s and game runs normal with ~20fps
Tested on GTX 670 btw

20fps is not the best experience, try with -i 1 -l K4x2

beachking2000

newbie

Activity: 29

Merit: 0

Hey Christian. Is there anyway to get the texture cache feature to work in the 12-18 build? I haven't had success compiling off the github with windows so cant get the extra hash rate.

cbuchner1

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 502

A bit of research on Fermi performance with the new X-perimental kernel (Dave Andersen's work ported over to Fermi)

GTX 560Ti 1280MB: 0.83 kHash/s with -X 8x1 <--- the low VRAM is really hurting
GT 630 4GB VRAM: 0.72 kHash/s <--- low cost, low performance. The RAM doesn't help Wink

GTX 660 OEM 4GB VRAM: 1.25 kHash/s <--- that is one strange OEM part, I must say.

The new code is about 50% faster then the existing Fermi kernel for scrypt-jane. But I do get occasional
validation errors on Fermi + Kepler when I enable -C 1 or -C 2. Strange. Hence avoid Fermi parts like the
plague if you intend to do scrypt-jane.

In comparison.

A GT 640 (GK107) 4GB at stock clocks will do something in the range of 1.65 kHash/s. This is somewhat less than I expected
because my GT750M laptop part (same chip) delivers 2.1 kHash/s.

A GT 640 (GK208) 1GB GDDR5 manages to do 1.25 kHash/s with mild overclock. Again the low VRAM is hurting.

I will be getting more Kepler parts for comparison. GTX 650, GTX 650Ti (not the Boost version) with 2GB each.

Christian

Tweek

sr. member

Activity: 308

Merit: 250

CoinTweak profitability charts

Quote from: Lionel on January 14, 2014, 03:37:38 PM

Quote from: Tweek on January 14, 2014, 09:21:19 AM

Quote from: Lionel on January 14, 2014, 07:36:56 AM

Guys let's try playing games while mining with cuda!
Try adding this options and let me know if the game lags

-i 1 -l S2x1

If the game lags try with

-i 1 -l S1x1

Lemme know

Lol that hashrate... 3.8kh/s while my 670 does 240kh/s on my own settings

too low you're right

try with these ones
-i 1 -l S3x3
-i 1 -l S5x5
-i 1 -l S6x6

should give a decent Kh/s while gaming,
for me
20Kh/s
40Kh/s
50Kh/s

and you? I have to try more aggressive configs

For gaming I use
-i 1 -l K8x2 = 55kh/s and game (guild wars 2) feels a little laggy with ~15fps
-i 1 -l K6x2 = 40kh/s and game runs normal with ~20fps
Tested on GTX 670 btw

Lionel

sr. member

Activity: 613

Merit: 305

Quote from: Tweek on January 14, 2014, 09:21:19 AM

Quote from: Lionel on January 14, 2014, 07:36:56 AM

Guys let's try playing games while mining with cuda!
Try adding this options and let me know if the game lags

-i 1 -l S2x1

If the game lags try with

-i 1 -l S1x1

Lemme know

Lol that hashrate... 3.8kh/s while my 670 does 240kh/s on my own settings

too low you're right

try with these ones
-i 1 -l S3x3
-i 1 -l S5x5
-i 1 -l S6x6

should give a decent Kh/s while gaming,
for me
20Kh/s
40Kh/s
50Kh/s

and you? I have to try more aggressive configs

cbuchner1

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 502

Quote from: ozie on January 14, 2014, 02:14:45 PM

But right now support for old deprecated Fermi Devices is more important Grin

My GTX 560 Ti 448 core edition is anything but deprecated. It does something in the region of 280 kHash/s for scrypt mining.
Before Dave Andersen came along, Fermis were hashing stronger than Keplers.

Christian

ozie

full member

Activity: 239

Merit: 103

This is due to the fact that with scrypt-jane you also need to calculate a KECCAK hash. This is done by the cpu singlethreaded atm.
I hope in the future there will be an option to offload it to the GPU like the SHA256 hash for scrypt.

But right now support for old deprecated Fermi Devices is more important Grin

Maxwell btw. is looking very promising for mining. If the rumors are true even Mobile GPU gets 6 Gig RAM.

Snard

full member

Activity: 140

Merit: 100

I see...I thought i had read that elsewhere, but couldn't find the post. Thanks for clarifying.

cbuchner1

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 502

Quote from: Snard on January 14, 2014, 02:06:08 PM

I am confused by the cudaminer scrypt-jane hash rates as they seem quite low for certain coins. For example, in cache using cgminer with scrypt jane support I am getting in the mhps range compared to cudaminer, which gives me around 20 khps.

Is this simply a difference in how cgminer vs cudaminer are reporting the hash rate or something else?

cudaminer is not yet suitable for low Nfactor coins, as the Kekkac part is done on the CPU with unoptimized code

for such coins cgminer for scrypt-jane will beat cudaminer.

Treggar

full member

Activity: 196

Merit: 100

Quote from: Snard on January 14, 2014, 02:06:08 PM

I am confused by the cudaminer scrypt-jane hash rates as they seem quite low for certain coins. For example, in cache using cgminer with scrypt jane support I am getting in the mhps range compared to cudaminer, which gives me around 20 khps.

Is this simply a difference in how cgminer vs cudaminer are reporting the hash rate or something else?

Depends on the coin... the older a coin is the lower the hashrates you'll get

Snard

full member

Activity: 140

Merit: 100

I am confused by the GTX 670 cudaminer scrypt-jane hash rates as they seem quite low for certain coins. For example, in cache using cgminer with scrypt jane support I am getting in the mhps range compared to cudaminer, which gives me around 20 khps.

Is this simply a difference in how cgminer vs cudaminer are reporting the hash rate or something else?

ManIkWeet

full member

Activity: 182

Merit: 100

I just found another YACoin block Grin

I say when Christian finds 2 in a row on a frequent basis...

sambiohazard

hero member

Activity: 840

Merit: 1000

Quote from: patoberli on January 14, 2014, 12:40:41 PM

-b 32768 it's even a little bit higher (13 %) and interactive mode is "gone", means it's laggy again.
Both options is laggy and 4 % CPU load.
-i is laggy and 4-8 % load.

Can do more tests tomorrow.

Now I am no expert but I have observed that lag can increase with increase in use of graphic card RAM. e.g. on my gtx 275 896 MB

L60x3 uses 840 MB and PC is laggy

L80x1 uses 650 MB and PC is less laggy. I can watch youtube video at least.

also 80x1 gives more khashes. Just my observation.

patoberli

member

Activity: 106

Merit: 10

-b 32768 it's even a little bit higher (13 %) and interactive mode is "gone", means it's laggy again.
Both options is laggy and 4 % CPU load.
-i is laggy and 4-8 % load.

Can do more tests tomorrow.

cbuchner1

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 502

Quote from: patoberli on January 14, 2014, 11:33:41 AM

As I guess that my Edit could go forgotten, just discovered that my CPU load went from ~1% to 11% with this new version with scrypt-jane.
11% = 1 CPU core fully loaded.

also getting this with -b 32768 and / or -i 0 ?

patoberli

member

Activity: 106

Merit: 10

As I guess that my Edit could go forgotten, just discovered that my CPU load went from ~1% to 11% with this new version with scrypt-jane.
11% = 1 CPU core fully loaded.

cbuchner1

hero member

Activity: 756

Merit: 502

Quote from: patoberli on January 14, 2014, 10:53:18 AM

Speed scrypt-jane went from 0.46 kh/s (non-interactive) to 0.59 kh/s (interactive) or 0.63 (non-interactive)
Scrypt went from 84 kh/s (interactive) down to 63 kh/s (interactive), including some HW errors:
With scrypt and -C 0 speed is down to 57 kh/s.

At the moment I am primarily interested in boosting the jane speed for Fermi (for purely selfish motives) - and it seems I have succeeded.

My list of Fermi devices is long:
GTX 560 Ti 448 core edition
GTX 660 (OEM label "V660-4098B") <-- what a shameful product mislabeling!
GT 630

However I find it rather bizarre that scrypt performance dropped quite a bit. That is somewhat unexpected.

I have seen some validation errors even on Kepler myself when used with the -C option. I have to investigate this a bit more.

Christian

patoberli

member

Activity: 106

Merit: 10

Big thanks!
First of all, interactive mode works smooooth

Speed scrypt-jane went from 0.46 kh/s (non-interactive) to 0.59 kh/s (interactive) or 0.63 (non-interactive) on my Quadro 4000 with this start configuration:

Code:

D:\bitcoin\yacoin\test>cudaminer.exe -a scrypt-jane -l X12x1 -o stratum+tcp://yac.coinmine.pl:9088 -O username.2:password

Scrypt went from 84 kh/s (interactive) down to 63 kh/s (interactive), including some HW errors:

Code:

D:\bitcoin\yacoin\test>cudaminer.exe -i 1 -H 2 -C 1 -l X8x16 -o stratum+tcp://gld.cryptcoins.net:5533 -O username.2:password
   *** CudaMiner for nVidia GPUs by Christian Buchner ***
   This is version 2013-12-18 (beta)
   based on pooler-cpuminer 2.3.2 (c) 2010 Jeff Garzik, 2012 pooler
   Cuda additions Copyright 2013 Christian Buchner
   My donation address: LKS1WDKGED647msBQfLBHV3Ls8sveGncnm

[2014-01-14 15:45:22] 1 miner threads started, using 'scrypt' algorithm.
[2014-01-14 15:45:22] Starting Stratum on stratum+tcp://gld.cryptcoins.net:5533
[2014-01-14 15:45:22] Stratum detected new block
[2014-01-14 15:45:23] GPU #0: Quadro 4000 with compute capability 2.0
[2014-01-14 15:45:23] GPU #0: interactive: 1, tex-cache: 1D, single-alloc: 1
[2014-01-14 15:45:23] GPU #0: using launch configuration X8x16
[2014-01-14 15:45:23] GPU #0: Quadro 4000, 22.76 khash/s
[2014-01-14 15:45:40] GPU #0: Quadro 4000 result does not validate on CPU (i=203
5, s=0)!
[2014-01-14 15:45:42] GPU #0: Quadro 4000, 63.17 khash/s
[2014-01-14 15:45:42] accepted: 1/1 (100.00%), 63.17 khash/s (yay!!!)
[2014-01-14 15:45:55] GPU #0: Quadro 4000, 63.35 khash/s
[2014-01-14 15:45:56] accepted: 2/2 (100.00%), 63.35 khash/s (yay!!!)
Ctrl-C
^C

With scrypt and -C 0 speed is down to 57 kh/s.

Please note that I also had to change the compiler option compute_30 to _20 and not just sm_20.

The GPU load with scrypt-jane is still a bit lower (93-99% in GPU-Z) than with scrypt (constant 98-99%), but I appreciate that, because the GPU fan is running much slower and the temp of the GPU is also much lower

[Edit]
Just discovered that my CPU load went from ~1% to 11% with this new version with scrypt-jane.

Topic: [ANN] cudaMiner & ccMiner CUDA based mining applications [Windows/Linux/MacOSX] - page 1009. (Read 3426921 times)