[ANN]pledge for the release of 100% faster cuda 7.5 nvidia miner for neoscrypt - page 5.

djm34

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1050

Quote from: s7icky on January 24, 2016, 12:58:33 PM

Quote from: djm34 on January 24, 2016, 12:56:41 PM

Quote from: s7icky on January 24, 2016, 12:51:58 PM

things went a little higher after running for a bit....

[2016-01-24 12:51:11] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 959
[2016-01-24 12:51:11] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 999
[2016-01-24 12:51:12] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 944
[2016-01-24 12:51:12] accepted: 796/796 (100.00%), 1919 kH/s yes!
[2016-01-24 12:51:15] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 988
[2016-01-24 12:51:16] accepted: 797/797 (100.00%), 1920 kH/s yes!

wow almost 1MH/s I should have bought one of these Grin

(yeah well, waiting for Pascal now...)

whats the default intensity it runs at
i keep getting out of memory errors when i raise it

not entirely sure...
#thread = 256 * 64 * 5 on cuda 7.5 intensity is #thread = 2^intensity (so it is between 16.47 and 16.48)
and
#thread = 256 * 64 * 4 on cuda 6.5 (probably possible to raise it here) ==> intensity = 16

s7icky

member

Activity: 106

Merit: 10

Quote from: djm34 on January 24, 2016, 12:56:41 PM

Quote from: s7icky on January 24, 2016, 12:51:58 PM

things went a little higher after running for a bit....

[2016-01-24 12:51:11] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 959
[2016-01-24 12:51:11] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 999
[2016-01-24 12:51:12] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 944
[2016-01-24 12:51:12] accepted: 796/796 (100.00%), 1919 kH/s yes!
[2016-01-24 12:51:15] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 988
[2016-01-24 12:51:16] accepted: 797/797 (100.00%), 1920 kH/s yes!

wow almost 1MH/s I should have bought one of these Grin

(yeah well, waiting for Pascal now...)

whats the default intensity it runs at
i keep getting out of memory errors when i raise it

960 went up also......

2016-01-24 13:02:44] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 430
2016-01-24 13:02:44] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 419
2016-01-24 13:02:45] accepted: 107/107 (100.00%), 427.48 kH/s yes!
2016-01-24 13:02:50] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 429
2016-01-24 13:02:50] accepted: 108/108 (100.00%), 427.33 kH/s yes!
2016-01-24 13:02:52] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 422
2016-01-24 13:02:53] accepted: 109/109 (100.00%), 427.18 kH/s yes!
2016-01-24 13:03:11] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 430
2016-01-24 13:03:12] accepted: 110/110 (100.00%), 427.37 kH/s yes!
2016-01-24 13:03:14] neoscrypt.usa.nicehash.com:3341 neoscrypt block 1060031
2016-01-24 13:03:14] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 432
2016-01-24 13:03:19] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 425
2016-01-24 13:03:19] accepted: 111/111 (100.00%), 427.50 kH/s yes!
2016-01-24 13:03:20] neoscrypt.usa.nicehash.com:3341 neoscrypt block 1060032
2016-01-24 13:03:20] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 431

djm34

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1050

Quote from: s7icky on January 24, 2016, 12:51:58 PM

things went a little higher after running for a bit....

[2016-01-24 12:51:11] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 959
[2016-01-24 12:51:11] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 999
[2016-01-24 12:51:12] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 944
[2016-01-24 12:51:12] accepted: 796/796 (100.00%), 1919 kH/s yes!
[2016-01-24 12:51:15] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 988
[2016-01-24 12:51:16] accepted: 797/797 (100.00%), 1920 kH/s yes!

wow almost 1MH/s I should have bought one of these Grin

(yeah well, waiting for Pascal now...)

s7icky

member

Activity: 106

Merit: 10

things went a little higher after running for a bit....

[2016-01-24 12:51:11] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 959
[2016-01-24 12:51:11] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 999
[2016-01-24 12:51:12] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 944
[2016-01-24 12:51:12] accepted: 796/796 (100.00%), 1919 kH/s yes!
[2016-01-24 12:51:15] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 988
[2016-01-24 12:51:16] accepted: 797/797 (100.00%), 1920 kH/s yes!

djm34

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1050

Quote from: s7icky on January 24, 2016, 12:35:56 PM

Quote from: djm34 on January 24, 2016, 12:34:10 PM

Quote from: s7icky on January 24, 2016, 12:31:27 PM

[2016-01-24 12:30:10] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 955
[2016-01-24 12:30:10] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 948
[2016-01-24 12:30:11] accepted: 215/215 (100.00%), 1895 kH/s yes!
[2016-01-24 12:30:11] accepted: 216/216 (100.00%), 1895 kH/s yes!

[2016-01-24 12:30:36] GPU #2: GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 206
[2016-01-24 12:30:36] accepted: 47/47 (100.00%), 202.73 kH/s yes!

[2016-01-24 12:28:55] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 417
[2016-01-24 12:28:55] accepted: 29/29 (100.00%), 400.06 kH/s yes!

ok looks good, is it cuda 6.5 or cuda 7.5 ? for the moment cuda 6.5 should do better on the big gun

yea 6.5 is a little faster maybe 100 if that

do u think u will be able to get more out of 7.5 with a 980ti?

can you compile it yourself ? I had to add a __syncthreads() to prevent a few card from spewing cpu validation problem,
if it is removed, it should give you already some speed increase for both cuda 6.5/cuda 7.5

(for the moment for cuda 7.5, I am still searching a few way of optimizing it).

Also as you have more memory than a 980, you could also try to use the --intensity flag to raise the number of thread, this should also increase a bit your performance.

maxim000

full member

Activity: 304

Merit: 100

ASUS 750Ti 2Gb GPU overclocked to 1396 mgz - 227mh cuda 7.5 , 231mh cuda 6.5

_sp release 69 get 200mh

thanks !

s7icky

member

Activity: 106

Merit: 10

Quote from: djm34 on January 24, 2016, 12:34:10 PM

Quote from: s7icky on January 24, 2016, 12:31:27 PM

[2016-01-24 12:30:10] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 955
[2016-01-24 12:30:10] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 948
[2016-01-24 12:30:11] accepted: 215/215 (100.00%), 1895 kH/s yes!
[2016-01-24 12:30:11] accepted: 216/216 (100.00%), 1895 kH/s yes!

[2016-01-24 12:30:36] GPU #2: GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 206
[2016-01-24 12:30:36] accepted: 47/47 (100.00%), 202.73 kH/s yes!

[2016-01-24 12:28:55] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 417
[2016-01-24 12:28:55] accepted: 29/29 (100.00%), 400.06 kH/s yes!

ok looks good, is it cuda 6.5 or cuda 7.5 ? for the moment cuda 6.5 should do better on the big gun

yea 6.5 is a little faster maybe 100 if that

do u think u will be able to get more out of 7.5 with a 980ti?

djm34

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1050

Quote from: s7icky on January 24, 2016, 12:31:27 PM

[2016-01-24 12:30:10] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 955
[2016-01-24 12:30:10] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 948
[2016-01-24 12:30:11] accepted: 215/215 (100.00%), 1895 kH/s yes!
[2016-01-24 12:30:11] accepted: 216/216 (100.00%), 1895 kH/s yes!

[2016-01-24 12:30:36] GPU #2: GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 206
[2016-01-24 12:30:36] accepted: 47/47 (100.00%), 202.73 kH/s yes!

[2016-01-24 12:28:55] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 417
[2016-01-24 12:28:55] accepted: 29/29 (100.00%), 400.06 kH/s yes!

ok looks good, is it cuda 6.5 or cuda 7.5 ? for the moment cuda 6.5 should do better on the big gun

s7icky

member

Activity: 106

Merit: 10

[2016-01-24 12:30:10] GPU #1: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 955
[2016-01-24 12:30:10] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 980 Ti, 948
[2016-01-24 12:30:11] accepted: 215/215 (100.00%), 1895 kH/s yes!
[2016-01-24 12:30:11] accepted: 216/216 (100.00%), 1895 kH/s yes!

[2016-01-24 12:30:36] GPU #2: GeForce GTX 750 Ti, 206
[2016-01-24 12:30:36] accepted: 47/47 (100.00%), 202.73 kH/s yes!

[2016-01-24 12:28:55] GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 417
[2016-01-24 12:28:55] accepted: 29/29 (100.00%), 400.06 kH/s yes!

djm34

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1050

Quote from: sp_ on January 24, 2016, 12:16:41 PM

Quote from: joblo on January 24, 2016, 06:11:01 AM

Compiled with cuda 6.5 on Fedora 20.
EVGA 970 sc 640KH/s up from 580. Seven invalid nonces in 10 minutes.
Awsome work. Thanks to you SP and all the donators, especially crackfoo.

10.4% faster. This is far form the 100% that was promised...

100% is from the crap which was sitting in your "special cuda 7.5" release Grin

also the code of this morning was optimized for cuda 7.5 and not cuda 6.5 and using 6.5 was giving lower performance
now this has been solved while you were acting like a moron on your thread.

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

Quote from: joblo on January 24, 2016, 06:11:01 AM

Compiled with cuda 6.5 on Fedora 20.
EVGA 970 sc 640KH/s up from 580. Seven invalid nonces in 10 minutes.
Awsome work. Thanks to you SP and all the donators, especially crackfoo.

10.4% faster. This is far form the 100% that was promised...

djm34

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1050

Quote from: s7icky on January 24, 2016, 12:11:38 PM

Quote from: djm34 on January 24, 2016, 12:06:12 PM

ok, first release for neoscrypt: https://github.com/djm34/ccminer-sp-neoscrypt/releases

It contains exe for both cuda 6.5 and cuda 7.5 for windows (the version will pick up the best set of parameter for cuda 6.5/cuda 7.5 depending if you use cuda 6.5/cuda 7.5

testing now.

Thank you sir!!!!!

don't forget to report. also, you'll get better performance when overclocked (obviously)

s7icky

member

Activity: 106

Merit: 10

Quote from: djm34 on January 24, 2016, 12:06:12 PM

ok, first release for neoscrypt: https://github.com/djm34/ccminer-sp-neoscrypt/releases

It contains exe for both cuda 6.5 and cuda 7.5 for windows (the version will pick up the best set of parameter for cuda 6.5/cuda 7.5 depending if you use cuda 6.5/cuda 7.5

testing now.

Thank you sir!!!!!

joblo

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1114

Quote from: djm34 on January 24, 2016, 12:04:28 PM

Quote from: joblo on January 24, 2016, 11:49:07 AM

Quote from: joblo on January 24, 2016, 06:52:34 AM

Quote from: djm34 on January 24, 2016, 06:38:15 AM

Quote from: joblo on January 24, 2016, 06:29:11 AM

Whirlpool compile failed on first attempt on Centos 6 cuda 7.5. trying again
and will also try cuda 6.5.

Update: Failed again

x15/cuda_x15_whirlpool.cu(2783): error: identifier "UINT32_MAX" is undefined

what exactly are you reporting ?

Something unrelated to your new kernel. I cloming it again in case of a corrupt download.

I just remembered I've seen this before on the same machine and only on that machine.
It started around v1.5.70. I work around it by ading a #define in the fike that fails to
compile. Probably an issue with my system.

can't really help you with centos, try to ask epsylon3 is the expert in all kind of linux

Just an FYI, not asking for help, but thanks.

djm34

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1050

ok, first release for neoscrypt: https://github.com/djm34/ccminer-sp-neoscrypt/releases

It contains exe for both cuda 6.5 and cuda 7.5 for windows (the version will pick up the best set of parameter for cuda 6.5/cuda 7.5 depending if you use cuda 6.5/cuda 7.5

djm34

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1050

Quote from: joblo on January 24, 2016, 11:49:07 AM

Quote from: joblo on January 24, 2016, 06:52:34 AM

Quote from: djm34 on January 24, 2016, 06:38:15 AM

Quote from: joblo on January 24, 2016, 06:29:11 AM

Whirlpool compile failed on first attempt on Centos 6 cuda 7.5. trying again
and will also try cuda 6.5.

Update: Failed again

x15/cuda_x15_whirlpool.cu(2783): error: identifier "UINT32_MAX" is undefined

what exactly are you reporting ?

Something unrelated to your new kernel. I cloming it again in case of a corrupt download.

I just remembered I've seen this before on the same machine and only on that machine.
It started around v1.5.70. I work around it by ading a #define in the fike that fails to
compile. Probably an issue with my system.

can't really help you with centos, try to ask epsylon3 is the expert in all kind of linux

joblo

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1114

Quote from: joblo on January 24, 2016, 06:52:34 AM

Quote from: djm34 on January 24, 2016, 06:38:15 AM

Quote from: joblo on January 24, 2016, 06:29:11 AM

Whirlpool compile failed on first attempt on Centos 6 cuda 7.5. trying again
and will also try cuda 6.5.

Update: Failed again

x15/cuda_x15_whirlpool.cu(2783): error: identifier "UINT32_MAX" is undefined

what exactly are you reporting ?

Something unrelated to your new kernel. I cloming it again in case of a corrupt download.

I just remembered I've seen this before on the same machine and only on that machine.
It started around v1.5.70. I work around it by ading a #define in the fike that fails to
compile. Probably an issue with my system.

djm34

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1050

could you please try the newest version on github.
This is should use the best set of parameter depending if you are using cuda 6.5 or cuda 7.5 (since it isn't the same parameter)
problem with cpu validation should also be corrected, need some optimization as well as not all card need it...

please also report best intensity and fill up eliovp spreadsheet at http://62.212.74.86/~mining/list/

s7icky

member

Activity: 106

Merit: 10

Quote from: djm34 on January 24, 2016, 05:02:46 AM

Quote from: s7icky on January 24, 2016, 12:07:52 AM

f5 f5 f5 f5 f5 f5

you know, that I sleep from time to time
actually the source has been put on github yesterday (silently... as I am checking a few things in the mean time)
(I will probably also release the source of my own release, because the release of sp seems to cause several problem in performance)

nope ur not allowed to sleep Tongue

djm34

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1050

ok here the list of the donators I got from my pm box and browsing through that thread,
if I forgot your name (it is your fault Grin

as I said to send me a pm),
let me know, I will add it (please just don't make me crossref everything...) :

(to be added to readme.txt and readme.md)

===== acknowledgment ========

djm34 would like to thank all the people who participated in the pledge and made that release possible:

Nicehash
antantti
crackers (www.zpool.ca)
scryptr
Liquid71
sp_
frazier34567
thefix
chrysophylax
ldw-com
Grout
serg_25
s7icky
Grim
Pivlus
lawrencelyl
sambiohazard
ltc_bilic
crsminer

========================================================

Topic: [ANN]pledge for the release of 100% faster cuda 7.5 nvidia miner for neoscrypt - page 5. (Read 17315 times)