[ANN] cudaMiner & ccMiner CUDA based mining applications [Windows/Linux/MacOSX] - page 196.

liomojo1

hero member

Activity: 676

Merit: 500

Quote from: zelante on August 01, 2014, 12:10:09 AM

v2.0.1 "Split Screen" (2014-08-01) Windows Binary alfa version

Rewrite for work with all ccminer forks where console output for gpu looks like this:
[2014-08-01 06:38:56] GPU #2: GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 291.38 H/s

Install: copy in your miner exe directory

Launch:
splitscreen.exe <"arguments"> <--height xx>

miner - name of miner exe
arguments - string of arguments for miner
--height - number of rows in console window (default: 30)

do NOT use -q key in argument string!

Example:
splitscreen.exe ccminer.exe "-a cryptonight -o stratum+tcp://xmr1.crypto-pool.fr:7777 -u 4AbB64kKv2rQuw3M3iSHhKGgfnkETg3mMWuDLACeJAnqKwhb6jZxs1dFXvRUgtTPj2Mt6EM6d3FGZLA YyVuh6WKy7ohqVYY -p x"

splitscreen.exe nvminer.exe "-d 0,1,2 -a jackpot -o stratum+tcp://www.hashharder.com:9958 -u JfQVwQBdbqeL2Vo1zNrPgD4AGWoqjzExSA -p x" --height 50

https://github.com/zelante/ccminer/releases/download/v2.0.1/splitscreen_v2.0.1_alfa.zip

Works like a charm. Super , thank you very much.

polanskiman

full member

Activity: 266

Merit: 100

ccminer and nvminer can't handle failover stratums at present, yes? no ?

FortuneNVirtue

member

Activity: 88

Merit: 10

Quote from: zelante on August 01, 2014, 12:10:09 AM

v2.0.1 "Split Screen" (2014-08-01) Windows Binary alfa version

Rewrite for work with all ccminer forks where console output for gpu looks like this:
[2014-08-01 06:38:56] GPU #2: GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 291.38 H/s

Install: copy in your miner exe directory

Launch:
splitscreen.exe <"arguments"> <--height xx>

miner - name of miner exe
arguments - string of arguments for miner
--height - number of rows in console window (default: 30)

do NOT use -q key in argument string!

Example:
splitscreen.exe ccminer.exe "-a cryptonight -o stratum+tcp://xmr1.crypto-pool.fr:7777 -u 4AbB64kKv2rQuw3M3iSHhKGgfnkETg3mMWuDLACeJAnqKwhb6jZxs1dFXvRUgtTPj2Mt6EM6d3FGZLA YyVuh6WKy7ohqVYY -p x"

splitscreen.exe nvminer.exe "-d 0,1,2 -a jackpot -o stratum+tcp://www.hashharder.com:9958 -u JfQVwQBdbqeL2Vo1zNrPgD4AGWoqjzExSA -p x" --height 50

https://github.com/zelante/ccminer/releases/download/v2.0.1/splitscreen_v2.0.1_alfa.zip

Very Good one (Work separately from the miner)
A little suggestion from me, would it be ok to have pool (-o) and user (-u) to display within your (upper part of) splitscreen ?

Edit- I got some error and it only lets me close the splitscreen.
(splitscreen with nvminer 7b)

zelante

full member

Activity: 263

Merit: 100

v2.0.1 "Split Screen" (2014-08-01) Windows Binary alfa version

Rewrite for work with all ccminer forks where console output for gpu looks like this:
[2014-08-01 06:38:56] GPU #2: GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 291.38 H/s

Install: copy in your miner exe directory

Launch:
splitscreen.exe <"arguments"> <--height xx>

miner - name of miner exe
arguments - string of arguments for miner
--height - number of rows in console window (default: 30)

do NOT use -q key in argument string!

Example:
splitscreen.exe ccminer.exe "-a cryptonight -o stratum+tcp://xmr1.crypto-pool.fr:7777 -u 4AbB64kKv2rQuw3M3iSHhKGgfnkETg3mMWuDLACeJAnqKwhb6jZxs1dFXvRUgtTPj2Mt6EM6d3FGZLA YyVuh6WKy7ohqVYY -p x"

splitscreen.exe nvminer.exe "-d 0,1,2 -a jackpot -o stratum+tcp://www.hashharder.com:9958 -u JfQVwQBdbqeL2Vo1zNrPgD4AGWoqjzExSA -p x" --height 50

https://github.com/zelante/ccminer/releases/download/v2.0.1/splitscreen_v2.0.1_alfa.zip

polanskiman

full member

Activity: 266

Merit: 100

Quote from: cayars on July 31, 2014, 10:01:07 PM

Quote from: polanskiman on July 31, 2014, 09:28:09 PM

Quote from: cayars on July 31, 2014, 09:09:16 PM

Just a reminder
IRC #ccminer

Cayars, did you see the last post I did regarding my rig? I used the -d flag and only used 1 card. Same hashrate.

Yep saw it. It's your CPU. Really the only semi-valid test would be to pull 5 GPUs out of your system and test with just one card so the computer and operating system don't have to manage the hardware. Even then with only 1 core it's still semi-meaningless.

You need minimal 2 cores for ccminer.

Ok. Just making sure I wont spend money for nothing.

Will go buy a 345 core CPU Cheesy

- joke. 12 is enough. Wink

bathrobehero

legendary

Activity: 2002

Merit: 1051

ICO? Not even once.

Quote from: dpcoinz on July 31, 2014, 09:34:08 PM

I seem to be getting a lot of rejects with the latest update of the code for the luffa-512 algo mining doom. Is anyone else getting more rejects? It seems to happen at the higher difficulties. When I start out at the lower difficulties, it accepts everything. As the difficulty rises, I get more and more booooo responses. If its only me, then it must be something I'm doing. If others are seeing it to, maybe something in the code needs to be addressed.

Thanks,

dp

I'm sticking with solomining for the same reason but you can keep restarting ccminer every few seconds/minutes before vardiff goes that high with a secondary .bat seen a few posts above.

Alternatively, running 1 instance of ccminer per card on different workers might keep vardiff's diff low enough but I haven't tried it.

cayars

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Quote from: polanskiman on July 31, 2014, 09:28:09 PM

Quote from: cayars on July 31, 2014, 09:09:16 PM

Just a reminder
IRC #ccminer

Cayars, did you see the last post I did regarding my rig? I used the -d flag and only used 1 card. Same hashrate.

Yep saw it. It's your CPU. Really the only semi-valid test would be to pull 5 GPUs out of your system and test with just one card so the computer and operating system don't have to manage the hardware. Even then with only 1 core it's still semi-meaningless.

You need minimal 2 cores for ccminer.

Quote from: dpcoinz on July 31, 2014, 09:34:08 PM

I seem to be getting a lot of rejects with the latest update of the code for the luffa-512 algo mining doom. Is anyone else getting more rejects? It seems to happen at the higher difficulties. When I start out at the lower difficulties, it accepts everything. As the difficulty rises, I get more and more booooo responses. If its only me, then it must be something I'm doing. If others are seeing it to, maybe something in the code needs to be addressed.

Thanks,

dp

Read back 2 or 3 pages and you'll see many people talking about this. The rejects have been there all along but with the higher hash rates you're getting higher diff which just makes it more obvious.

I'm not mining doom so I haven't looked into it to see if anything was obvious to me. The devs have seen this reported here in the thread.

dpcoinz

newbie

Activity: 24

Merit: 0

I seem to be getting a lot of rejects with the latest update of the code for the luffa-512 algo mining doom. Is anyone else getting more rejects? It seems to happen at the higher difficulties. When I start out at the lower difficulties, it accepts everything. As the difficulty rises, I get more and more booooo responses. If its only me, then it must be something I'm doing. If others are seeing it to, maybe something in the code needs to be addressed.

Thanks,

dp

polanskiman

full member

Activity: 266

Merit: 100

Quote from: cayars on July 31, 2014, 09:09:16 PM

Just a reminder
IRC #ccminer

Cayars, did you see the last post I did regarding my rig? I used the -d flag and only used 1 card. Same hashrate.

cayars

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Just a reminder
IRC #ccminer

mirny

legendary

Activity: 1108

Merit: 1005

which 750ti cards exactly have samsung memory?

cayars

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

Quote from: tarzanbigcity on July 31, 2014, 06:43:48 PM

Anyone feel like whipping up a miner for YellowLionCoin using SHA2-384 ?

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/annylc-yellowlioncoin-bounty-for-gpu-miner-launch-aug-1-2014-18-utc-714088

OMG, that is one of the worst "new" implementation yet.

DOOMED before launch.

djm34

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1050

Quote from: tarzanbigcity on July 31, 2014, 06:43:48 PM

Anyone feel like whipping up a miner for YellowLionCoin using SHA2-384 ?

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/annylc-yellowlioncoin-bounty-for-gpu-miner-launch-aug-1-2014-18-utc-714088

this is getting crazy... Huh

can they keep some "new stuff" for later ?
OpenCL bounty 0.01btc (nothing for nvidia, this is limit insulting but not as much as the bounty for opencl Grin

)

no thanks

not mentioning this is again a "fpga code ready" coin

tarzanbigcity

sr. member

Activity: 602

Merit: 250

Anyone feel like whipping up a miner for YellowLionCoin using SHA2-384 ?

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/annylc-yellowlioncoin-bounty-for-gpu-miner-launch-aug-1-2014-18-utc-714088

cayars

full member

Activity: 168

Merit: 100

I still don't think it's a problem per say of ccminer but the way the pools implement validation of the shares after a vardiff change.

Example: Some pools will except a share with a lower/higher diff for a certain period of time after a change (how they should all work).
Other pools will throw out/reject any share that doesn't match the current diff setting.

This is just the way things work but not a problem per say in ccminer that I know of.

Carlo

djm34

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1050

Quote from: bathrobehero on July 31, 2014, 05:05:56 PM

To my understanding ccminer calculates hashes massively in parallel which means if vardiff switches, ccminer still going to submit a chain of hashes which have lower difficulty.
I can't see any other explonation why we have massive chains of rejecteds always only after vardiff changes. I might be completely wrong.

Edit:
djm34's explonation:
What I think is that it solve several share within a cycle and don't report them all (or they somehow get overwritten) I need to investigate that in detail (I am pretty sure the problem also exist in keccak)

Quote from: bathrobehero on July 31, 2014, 05:05:56 PM

To my understanding ccminer calculates hashes massively in parallel which means if vardiff switches, ccminer still going to submit a chain of hashes which have lower difficulty.
I can't see any other explonation why we have massive chains of rejecteds always only after vardiff changes. I might be completely wrong.

Edit:
djm34's explonation:
What I think is that it solve several share within a cycle and don't report them all (or they somehow get overwritten) I need to investigate that in detail (I am pretty sure the problem also exist in keccak)

that wouldn't cause a duplicated share problem but rather a stale problem (meaning a valid hash which doesn't corresponds anymore to the actual data the pool wants to get solved...).
An other solution, is that I go way over the max nonce value and I loop all over again a second time (actually this can happen however in this case it should just loop infinitely without sending anything at all).
I will soon have more time to look into that, but for the moment I really don't have time...

edit: may-be reducing the max number of thread could help, but this would also decrease the gpu usage...

tbearhere

legendary

Activity: 3164

Merit: 1003

You need your miner bat in a loop separately. Example:

miner.bat:
:start
nvMiner.exe -a luffa -o stratum+tcp://doom.suprnova.cc:5112 -u -p x -d 0,1,2,3
goto start

loop.bat:
:start
timeout -t 30
taskkill -t -f /im ccminer.exe
goto start

I think you could do it one bat with the Start command but I prefer to have it separately.
[/quote]

you mean like this
FIRST BAT FILE
:start
nvMiner.exe -a luffa -o stratum+tcp://doom.suprnova.cc:5112 -u -p x -d 0,1,2,3
goto start

SECOND BAT FILE
loop.nvMiner.exe -a luffa -o stratum+tcp://doom.suprnova.cc:5112 -u -p x -d 0,1,2,3
:start
timeout -t 30
taskkill -t -f /im nvMiner.exe
goto start

?

bathrobehero

legendary

Activity: 2002

Merit: 1051

ICO? Not even once.

Quote from: tbearhere on July 31, 2014, 05:13:56 PM

the taskkill -t -f /im ccminer.exe isn't closing the program to restart but it loops

EDIT:

echo off
nvMiner.exe -a luffa -o stratum+tcp://doom.suprnova.cc:5112 -u -p x -d 0,1,2,3
:start
timeout -t 10
taskkill -t -f /im nvMiner.exe
cls
goto start

You need your miner bat in a loop separately. Example:

miner.bat:
:start
nvMiner.exe -a luffa -o stratum+tcp://doom.suprnova.cc:5112 -u -p x -d 0,1,2,3
goto start

loop.bat:
:start
timeout -t 30
taskkill -t -f /im ccminer.exe
goto start

I think you could do it one bat with the Start command but I prefer to have it separately.

tbearhere

legendary

Activity: 3164

Merit: 1003

Quote from: tbearhere on July 31, 2014, 04:50:20 PM

Quote from: bathrobehero on July 31, 2014, 04:42:49 PM

Quote from: tbearhere on July 31, 2014, 04:25:14 PM

Quote from: tbearhere on July 31, 2014, 02:38:36 PM

Quote from: S_tring on July 31, 2014, 12:32:43 PM

There seems to be a lot of rejects for Doom on Suprnova. Usually around 85% yays. Anyone else getting that?

yes alot im in using the new drivers but ill turn them back after doom coin

this is a coin that could use this restart bat file but cant get timer part to work with ccminer or nvminer. Works with cuda.

:start
nvMiner.exe -a luffa -o stratum+tcp://doom.suprnova.cc:5112 -u -p x --time-limit 180
goto start

does anybody know if you can use this timer command in ccminer or nvminer ?

Nope, but until then you can run a secondary bat file that closes ccminer periodically:

echo off
title control
:start
timeout -t 30
taskkill -t -f /im ccminer.exe
cls
goto start

I'll ask ocminer to open up a port with static difficulty as the problem comes from ccminer not being a big fan of vardiff.

thank you

the taskkill -t -f /im ccminer.exe isn't closing the program to restart but it loops

EDIT:

echo off
nvMiner.exe -a luffa -o stratum+tcp://doom.suprnova.cc:5112 -u -p x -d 0,1,2,3
:start
timeout -t 10
taskkill -t -f /im nvMiner.exe
cls
goto start

bathrobehero

legendary

Activity: 2002

Merit: 1051

ICO? Not even once.

To my understanding ccminer calculates hashes massively in parallel which means if vardiff switches, ccminer still going to submit a chain of hashes which have lower difficulty.
I can't see any other explonation why we have massive chains of rejecteds always only after vardiff changes. I might be completely wrong.

Edit:
djm34's explonation:
What I think is that it solve several share within a cycle and don't report them all (or they somehow get overwritten) I need to investigate that in detail (I am pretty sure the problem also exist in keccak)

Topic: [ANN] cudaMiner & ccMiner CUDA based mining applications [Windows/Linux/MacOSX] - page 196. (Read 3426932 times)