Topic: [ANN] [PASC] PascalCoin, true deletable blockchain - V3 Hardfork on block 210000 - page 364. (Read 990837 times)

Eth is a bad metric though, since it's memory bound

Got lucky and hit 3 blocks last night with my 1060.
Still, this became clearly AMD territory.

Thanks again Vork for all your efforts!

You can't..

HI all!
where can I download ready miner for AMD cards?

thanks

Going by the performance difference of the GTX 1060 vs RX480's in eth/dag I don't think a well-running RX480 will see more than 400MH per card.
More like 340-350MH.

I tell you though, once the AMD miner is out, the net hash rate will hit 40PH within a day or two.

Probably ~25-30 AMD GPUs with an unoptimized miner, or perhaps as few at ~15-20 with an optimized one.

Yup, it's just a silly artifact of the dumb way I measure hashrate in my CUDAminer (and it will probably appear in the OpenCL version too, since I'm going to reuse as much code as possible to save time). It basically calculates a "time" value which is only based on the hour, minute, second, and millisecond. As such, when the day rolls over, the start time appears appears as a larger number than the "current time", so the hashrate is negative (and also wrong). Just restart the miner if you want to get correct hashrate.

The GPU miner was an absolute hackjob, so I did the minimum work necessary to make it actually work for its intended purpose. One side-effect is that, when running for a long time, the hashrate measurement is incorrect. Time permitting, will fix at some point by using a non-disgusting way of measuring milliseconds elapsed since the beginning of mining.
 

It certainly will. No promises, but you'll probably see an card like the RX 480 hit 500 MH/s+, and "ocminer" probably has ~10,000 MH/s or ~20 RX 480s (or a more optimized/faster miner with fewer/different cards, of course). An optimized kernel with BFI and an even more intelligent midstate would certainly do even better, but just grabbing my CUDA code, shoving it in a .CL file, changing the method signature/params, and then (the time consuming part) building the host code should see pretty significant improvements over CUDA. Also for anyone wondering: the OpenCL implementation won't provide any benefit for NVidia cards.

For anyone who's of the technical persuasion wondering why AMD GPUs are so much faster than NVidia GPUs for SHA-256 and similar hashing functions:
NVidia focuses more on architecture complexity, AMD focuses more on raw compute performance
SHA-256 uses 32-bit int rotation. AMD GPUs have a single instruction for this, NVidia GPUs have to do (a << r) | (a >> (32 - r)) which is two shifts and an 'or' instruction. So oversimplification: AMD chips are about 3 times better at 32-bit integer rotation.

As we saw with Siacoin (Blake2b-algo), NVidia GPUs performed amazingly well (still unable to match cost-per-dollar with AMD, but they were still incredibly competitive). Why was this? I was able to implement three of the four shifts used by Blake2b as byte_perm, since the rotations were rotations by amounts that were divisible by 8 (so the shifts could be realized as selecting certain bytes in a certain order, rather than actually shifting bits). In SHA-256, this is not the case (the shifts are by 2, 3, 5, 7, 10, 11, 13, 17, 18, 19, 22, and 25, none of which are divisible by 8...). Also, blake2b uses 64-bit rotations which AMD doesn't have a single instruction for (although their 32-bit instructions still offer some advantage).

GFLOPs isn't really a useful metric, since we're not concerned with floating point performance necessarily. GFLOPs is a nice tool to compare relative performance of multiple chips of the same architecture, but between architectures, for the purposes of mining, it isn't terribly useful.

Also, RX 480 arrived, so fingers crossed Saturday gives me enough time to throw this together.

My miner is showing negative hash rates. Any idea?

we should threaten to fork this guy off so he would be forced share his miner LOL (joke).

OCminer has won 574 out of the last 1026 blocks which is 56%.  Will this change if Vorksholk comes out with the new miner?

Anyone know what is the cost of the type of computer OCminer is using or one that would win blocks?  Thanks

Ok !
Ocminer is still mining all the blocks anyway !

Going by the difficulty and assuming we're hitting a block every 5 minutes (which we aren't, but the difficulty has had long enough to adjust that it's fluctuations are just statistical noise), the current network is about 14 or 15 GH/s.

That seems a lot less than it should be.
I mean that's only like 60 newer GPUs. Should be like 6 to 8 times that if we go by the top 2 miners.

No, thats the network hash rate

So Ocminer has between 12000 Mh/s and 16000 Mh/s per miner ?!??!

True.
But 5 minutes are a "theorical" average. Core is designed to addapt it's difficulty on each block with previous 100 blocks time average and with a higher decreasing difficulty than increasing difficulty. The result is that when hash rate is changing quickly average time is a value between 4 and 5 minutes.

5 minutes.

What's the estimated time for each block ? The time the difficulty tries to adjust itself to?