Hi Christian,
I missed the scenes for a few days. Now vertcoin is very profitable. VTC/BTC is almost 0.001 now.
Could you tell me some tips to configure Fermi cards for Vertcoin ?
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Topic: [ANN] cudaMiner & ccMiner CUDA based mining applications [Windows/Linux/MacOSX] - page 953. (Read 3426921 times)
February 03, 2014, 06:34:15 PM
February 03, 2014, 06:34:02 PM
k8x32 might require more memory cudaminer can allocate (in one piece).
Does -C 0 fix it?
Otherwise try using a lookup gap. -L 2 or -L 3 ... this reduces memory requirements.
and autotune with -l k after changing the lookup gap.
Christian
alright its working but i was hopeing i would get more of a hash rate.
currently using -a scrypt-jane:Yacoin -H 2 -d 1 -i 0 -C 0 -L 3 -l k95x1 and getting between 2.1 and 2.4khs
Any suggestions?
Nate
February 03, 2014, 06:27:53 PM
On my gtx 760 using Y6x32 i got 290khs max (microcoin), now with the k kernel with the new version i cant get more than 230 , and autotune is really slow and cant make an easy decision 
and stoped at k148x6. With the 18.12 version best config for K kernel was K9x32 (290khs), but now it gives me 120khs/s. For now my best result is with this config on prereleased cudaminer supporting Y kernel : -d 0 -i 1 -l Y6x32 -H 2 -C 0 if i put H to 1 or 0 i get half the result.
If anyone with same card have any better results please share.
Thank you for your great work . We Love you man.
and stoped at k148x6. With the 18.12 version best config for K kernel was K9x32 (290khs), but now it gives me 120khs/s. For now my best result is with this config on prereleased cudaminer supporting Y kernel : -d 0 -i 1 -l Y6x32 -H 2 -C 0 if i put H to 1 or 0 i get half the result.If anyone with same card have any better results please share.
Thank you for your great work . We Love you man.
February 03, 2014, 06:23:45 PM
2 EVGA 780TI reference models with Skyn3t's bios. Per the other posts on this thread, iv tried many combos of C/H/m with T at 15x24 with no luck
-C 2 -H 1 -m 1 -l T15x24 runs at 20khs no matter what C/H/m is at
Best auto was T480x1 at 620khs
This new version doesn't work so well for me
-C 2 -H 1 -m 1 -l T15x24 runs at 20khs no matter what C/H/m is at
Best auto was T480x1 at 620khs
This new version doesn't work so well for me
February 03, 2014, 06:20:05 PM
I have just discovered the strangest thing.
if I exit the folder, then re-open the bat file, it runs, but still validation errors / low hash rate.
But if I exit the command prompt, then try to re-open, it doesn't work. But if I leave the folder again, then open it, the command prompt works again. I've never seen anything like this and it only happens with the latest version.
K7x32 does not validate
Y7x32 does not validate
Lowcaser versions don't either.
GTX670 SLI. But with 12-18, it validates @ 570KH/s. This one shows around 697KH/s, but every other one fails to validate, so there's little point.
if I exit the folder, then re-open the bat file, it runs, but still validation errors / low hash rate.
But if I exit the command prompt, then try to re-open, it doesn't work. But if I leave the folder again, then open it, the command prompt works again. I've never seen anything like this and it only happens with the latest version.
K7x32 does not validate
Y7x32 does not validate
Lowcaser versions don't either.
GTX670 SLI. But with 12-18, it validates @ 570KH/s. This one shows around 697KH/s, but every other one fails to validate, so there's little point.
February 03, 2014, 06:11:42 PM
coming from previous version, my gtx 560 ti goes down from ~168kh to ~144kh using the same settings: -H 1 -i 0 -l F8x16 -C 1
autotune is even worse (i redownloaded the hotfix!), choosing F16x13 for ~130kh
anyone else here with gtx 560 ti?
autotune is even worse (i redownloaded the hotfix!), choosing F16x13 for ~130kh
anyone else here with gtx 560 ti?
February 03, 2014, 06:06:48 PM
I have a pause command.
The command prompt closes anyways.
And the -O command works with 12-18, but not the newer ones, and every config, even the ones in this thread show to use it. So explain to me.
I have never seen a more rude author of a program. Abit peeved, infact.
The command prompt closes anyways.
And the -O command works with 12-18, but not the newer ones, and every config, even the ones in this thread show to use it. So explain to me.
I have never seen a more rude author of a program. Abit peeved, infact.
February 03, 2014, 06:03:34 PM
what is this big -O at the end?
I assumed he cut his worker name and password on purpose.
If he didn't ... then it would be a noob error and the explanation for all his woes. ;-)
a pause command at the end of his BAT file would have shown that one of his
options passed was incorrect - instead of immediately closing the DOS window.
February 03, 2014, 05:55:33 PM
what is this big -O at the end?
February 03, 2014, 05:53:18 PM
For scrypt on GTX TITAN i think this is little bit better:
-d 0 -i 0 -C 2 -m 1 -H 1 -l T14x24 (605khash/s @ 928Mhz)
-d 0 -i 0 -C 2 -m 1 -H 1 -l T14x24 (605khash/s @ 928Mhz)
I'll have to try this out, I'm fairly sure that i'm getting very similar results with my config.
No matter what combination I use, the best I can get with T12x24 for my 780 is less than 1/3 of T12x20, ~170-185kh/s depending on settings.
Confirm some things for me:
- Make sure you are using the latest Nvidia Drivers, 332.21 for full Compute 5.5 support.
- Make sure you are unzipping a fresh copy of the files, not overwriting your current folder. I had a small issue where unpacking the latest releases and overwriting the files did not work correctly and cause funky hash rates. Not sure what went wrong but worth noting.
- Let us know the model of your card.
At the least we might be able to see if we can identify why this oddness is occurring and maybe make a separate recommendation for those that don't fall under the SMX x 24 bucket as intended. At worst it might be an unknown bug, but no telling until we run everything down.
Using 332.21:Yes. Win 8.1 x64 enterprise, 6gb ram, core i7 920 @ 4ghz
Unzipping to new folder: No difference. x86/x64 version, no difference
Card model: Gigabyte GTX 780 WF V2.0
Memory and GPU usage etcetc is the same, except that the power draw sits at around 45-50% instead of 85%+ with x20
I have the same card and am experiencing the same issue. This is the card; http://www.gigabyte.us/products/product-page.aspx?pid=4673
I'm running the latest build (w/ hotfix). I also compiled it myself, but it has the same issue.
GeForce 334.67 beta driver, Windows 8.1 x64 Pro, 16gb ram, Core i7-3770k @ 3.5 ghz
February 03, 2014, 05:51:54 PM
Tried upper and lowercase, said it in post.
It just closes automatically, doesn't even start.
It just closes automatically, doesn't even start.
Run it from the command propt. That way it'll stay open and you can see what happened.
February 03, 2014, 05:40:49 PM
Tried upper and lowercase, said it in post.
It just closes automatically, doesn't even start.
It just closes automatically, doesn't even start.
February 03, 2014, 05:35:39 PM
That made no sense.
cudaminer.exe -H 1 -m 1 -i 0 -l K7x32 -C 1 -o stratum+tcp://stratum-us.doge.hashfaster.com:3339 -O
Explain to me what is wrong with this config?
cudaminer.exe -H 1 -m 1 -i 0 -l K7x32 -C 1 -o stratum+tcp://stratum-us.doge.hashfaster.com:3339 -O
Explain to me what is wrong with this config?
Your config runs on my GTX 660Ti using cudaminer 2014-02-02 (x86) with about 313 kHash/s.
Doesn't make any sense to me either.
Does it state anything about "launch config requires too much memory" before failing?
Christian
February 03, 2014, 05:34:39 PM
For scrypt on GTX TITAN i think this is little bit better:
-d 0 -i 0 -C 2 -m 1 -H 1 -l T14x24 (605khash/s @ 928Mhz)
-d 0 -i 0 -C 2 -m 1 -H 1 -l T14x24 (605khash/s @ 928Mhz)
I'll have to try this out, I'm fairly sure that i'm getting very similar results with my config.
No matter what combination I use, the best I can get with T12x24 for my 780 is less than 1/3 of T12x20, ~170-185kh/s depending on settings.
Confirm some things for me:
- Make sure you are using the latest Nvidia Drivers, 332.21 for full Compute 5.5 support.
- Make sure you are unzipping a fresh copy of the files, not overwriting your current folder. I had a small issue where unpacking the latest releases and overwriting the files did not work correctly and cause funky hash rates. Not sure what went wrong but worth noting.
- Let us know the model of your card.
At the least we might be able to see if we can identify why this oddness is occurring and maybe make a separate recommendation for those that don't fall under the SMX x 24 bucket as intended. At worst it might be an unknown bug, but no telling until we run everything down.
Using 332.21:Yes. Win 8.1 x64 enterprise, 6gb ram, core i7 920 @ 4ghz
Unzipping to new folder: No difference. x86/x64 version, no difference
Card model: Gigabyte GTX 780 WF V2.0
Memory and GPU usage etcetc is the same, except that the power draw sits at around 45-50% instead of 85%+ with x20
February 03, 2014, 05:30:32 PM
GTX 760 speed went from 305 oc to 331 oc. Very nice! But the best part is that the temperature dropped down amazing 6-7°C. Nice job!
Any news on Cuda 6.0? You think it will boost mining speeds more than it is now?
Any news on Cuda 6.0? You think it will boost mining speeds more than it is now?
February 03, 2014, 05:28:40 PM
That made no sense.
cudaminer.exe -H 1 -m 1 -i 0 -l K7x32 -C 1 -o stratum+tcp://stratum-us.doge.hashfaster.com:3339 -O
Explain to me what is wrong with this config?
cudaminer.exe -H 1 -m 1 -i 0 -l K7x32 -C 1 -o stratum+tcp://stratum-us.doge.hashfaster.com:3339 -O
Explain to me what is wrong with this config?
Your config runs on my GTX 660Ti using cudaminer 2014-02-02 (x86) with about 313 kHash/s.
Doesn't make any sense to me either.
Does it state anything about "launch config requires too much memory" before failing?
Christian
February 03, 2014, 05:27:49 PM
Any ideas why both GPU's can't be used at the same time?
suspected nVidia driver bug. use two cudaminer instances. It's all in the README that no one bothers to read
I am running two seperate instances
2 seperate dos windows. 2 seperate folders, 2 seperate commands d 0 and d 1
ok then I apologize. No idea what causes it, really.
Curious that I could mine vertcoin or just plain old scrypt using this miner based on what looks to be version 2014-01-20 (beta) - http://kilovolt.co.uk/Vertcoin/Cudaminer64.zip
Using the same folder and executable but launching 2 seperate dos windows works just fine.
cudaminer --algo=scrypt -d 0 -H 2 -l K8x32 -i 1
cudaminer --algo=scrypt -d 1 -H 2 -l K8x32 -i 1
February 03, 2014, 05:21:13 PM
For scrypt on GTX TITAN i think this is little bit better:
-d 0 -i 0 -C 2 -m 1 -H 1 -l T14x24 (605khash/s @ 928Mhz)
-d 0 -i 0 -C 2 -m 1 -H 1 -l T14x24 (605khash/s @ 928Mhz)
I'll have to try this out, I'm fairly sure that i'm getting very similar results with my config.
No matter what combination I use, the best I can get with T12x24 for my 780 is less than 1/3 of T12x20, ~170-185kh/s depending on settings.
Confirm some things for me:
- Make sure you are using the latest Nvidia Drivers, 332.21 for full Compute 5.5 support.
- Make sure you are unzipping a fresh copy of the files, not overwriting your current folder. I had a small issue where unpacking the latest releases and overwriting the files did not work correctly and cause funky hash rates. Not sure what went wrong but worth noting.
- Let us know the model of your card.
At the least we might be able to see if we can identify why this oddness is occurring and maybe make a separate recommendation for those that don't fall under the SMX x 24 bucket as intended. At worst it might be an unknown bug, but no telling until we run everything down.
February 03, 2014, 05:18:30 PM
That made no sense.
cudaminer.exe -H 1 -m 1 -i 0 -l K7x32 -C 1 -o stratum+tcp://stratum-us.doge.hashfaster.com:3339 -O
Explain to me what is wrong with this config?
I tried changing the K to a Y, and lowercase k as well, but nothing.
With yesterdays version, I got validation errors.
With todays, it doesn't start at all.
With 12-18, it runs fine.
cudaminer.exe -H 1 -m 1 -i 0 -l K7x32 -C 1 -o stratum+tcp://stratum-us.doge.hashfaster.com:3339 -O
Explain to me what is wrong with this config?
I tried changing the K to a Y, and lowercase k as well, but nothing.
With yesterdays version, I got validation errors.
With todays, it doesn't start at all.
With 12-18, it runs fine.
February 03, 2014, 05:03:26 PM
Here is how launch configs from the cudaminer 2013-12-18 release translate to cudaminer 2014-02-02 release
to get equivalent performance. This can be handy if you find some older launch configs posted by others
L b x w -> sorry, legacy kernel was replaced by Fermi kernel. Autotune the F kernel.
F b x w -> F b x w ( no change to this one )
K b x w -> k 4*b x w (the previous K kernel is now named k and no. of blocks has to be quadrupled)
T b x w -> t 4*b x w (the previous T kernel is now named t and no. of blocks has to be quadrupled)
S b x w -> Spinlock kernel is GONE.
These following kernels are new in the cudaminer 2014-02-02 release: T (nVidia), K (nVidia), f (ported over from David Andersen's code).
Christian
to get equivalent performance. This can be handy if you find some older launch configs posted by others
L b x w -> sorry, legacy kernel was replaced by Fermi kernel. Autotune the F kernel.
F b x w -> F b x w ( no change to this one )
K b x w -> k 4*b x w (the previous K kernel is now named k and no. of blocks has to be quadrupled)
T b x w -> t 4*b x w (the previous T kernel is now named t and no. of blocks has to be quadrupled)
S b x w -> Spinlock kernel is GONE.
These following kernels are new in the cudaminer 2014-02-02 release: T (nVidia), K (nVidia), f (ported over from David Andersen's code).
Christian
Jump to: