CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell / Pascal kernels. - page 1010.

facanferff

newbie

Activity: 8

Merit: 0

Quote from: sp_ on August 10, 2015, 01:21:56 PM

I have compiled it with the api disabled as default:

in ccminer.cpp:

int opt_api_listen = 0; /* 0 to disable */

I'm running with parameters:
--api-bind=127.0.0.1:4068 -b 0.0.0.0:4068

Is it normal to give 0 to fan percent/rpm, but giving correct temperature?

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2954

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

I have compiled it with the api disabled as default:

in ccminer.cpp:

int opt_api_listen = 0; /* 0 to disable */

facanferff

newbie

Activity: 8

Merit: 0

In API it doesn't give me the correct fan percent/rpm (localhost:4068/hwinfo)...

Quote

GPU=0;BUS=1;CARD=GeForce GTX 850M;SM=500;MEM=2147483648;TEMP=66.0;FAN=0;RPM=0;FREQ=901500;MEMFREQ=900000;PST=P0;VID=10de;PID=1391;NVML=-1;NVAPI=0;SN=;BIOS=82.07.47.00.05|OS=windows;NVDRIVER=353.62;CPUS=8;CPUTEMP=0;CPUFREQ=0|�

Also, I noticed NVML=-1, is it normal?

djm34

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1050

Quote from: Slava_K on August 10, 2015, 11:59:08 AM

Today Lyra2 v2 start?

already started...

Slava_K

hero member

Activity: 677

Merit: 500

Today Lyra2 v2 start?

bensam1231

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1024

So a friendly update cause I'm sure you guys don't watch your power meters. Release 59 for Neo increases power usage by 30w per 970. I went from 190w to 220w.

That's a 15% increase in power usage. I only saw about a 5% increase in hashrate for Neo as well. I have since reverted to .56 as the new version reduces efficiency quite a bit.

zTheWolfz

full member

Activity: 231

Merit: 150

Quote from: sp_ on August 10, 2015, 10:19:52 AM

Wich driver are you using?

Can you try release 58?

Driver 353.30, sorry no more time to test today got to get some sleep.
Quick note with 57 & command line -i 22.9 -l 16x24 its showing me hash in this range.

@ Law I tried -x 64 and 96 in test, no help with 59 for my setup.

Code:

accepted: 62/62 (100.00%), 10258 khash/s yay!!!
quark.usa.nicehash.com:3345 quark block 2028639
GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 10301
quark.usa.nicehash.com:3345 quark block 2028640
GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 10204
GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 10211
accepted: 63/63 (100.00%), 10254 khash/s yay!!!
GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 10234
accepted: 64/64 (100.00%), 10249 khash/s yay!!!
quark.usa.nicehash.com:3345 quark block 2028641
GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 10249
GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 10304
accepted: 65/65 (100.00%), 10251 khash/s yay!!!
GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 10238
accepted: 66/66 (100.00%), 10253 khash/s yay!!!
GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 10194
accepted: 67/67 (100.00%), 10251 khash/s yay!!!
GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 10222
accepted: 68/68 (100.00%), 10249 khash/s yay!!!

lawrencelyl

member

Activity: 94

Merit: 10

Quote from: zTheWolfz on August 10, 2015, 09:26:20 AM

57 with -i 22.9 will test 59 with -X 128/256 now.

59 -X 128 below -X 256 was at 9970 max. no SS at 256 saw no need.

For GTX960, probably you'll want to try with "-X 64" or somewhere between 64 to 128.
For my GTX970/980, I'm using -X 128. I limit the TDP of the card, so lower CUDA threads count scores better.

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2954

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

Wich driver are you using?

Can you try release 58?

zTheWolfz

full member

Activity: 231

Merit: 150

57 with -i 22.9 will test 59 with -X 128/256 now.

59 -X 128 below -X 256 was at 9970 max. no SS at 256 saw no need.

joblo

legendary

Activity: 1470

Merit: 1114

Here's a heads up about performance states. nividia-settings powermizer has it backwards.

All discussions I have seen refer to 0 as the highest performance level and this is confirmed
with nvidia-smi.

But nvidia-settings powermizer has them reversed with level zero as the lowest and
level 4 as the highest performance level.

All of my previous posts were using the powermizer values so I apologize for any confusion.
I will be more clear in the future.

lawrencelyl

member

Activity: 94

Merit: 10

For this release 59, I'm using -X intensity parameter instead of -i. My older setting of "-i 23" seems not working well for me.
So, I dropped -i and used -X instead (setting the cuda threads count).

Here's what I found:

Release 58 and before:
-i 23 == 8388608 cuda threads
-i 24 == 16777216 cuda threads (default value if you don't specify any intensity)

Release 59:
-X 128 = 8388608 cuda threads
-X 256 = 16777216 cuda threads

Basically, number of cuda threads = 256 * 256 * (value of X)
sp mentioned it few posts above. Please correct me if I misinterpreted anything

zTheWolfz

full member

Activity: 231

Merit: 150

Quote from: sp_ on August 10, 2015, 08:26:44 AM

This is quark right?

try -i 22.9 (the default for 750ti)

Do you have more than one card in the rig? Is the card trottling? Check the temperature, if it reaches 70 degress c it will automaticly downclock,. Also make sure your card is in the p0 state. Defalt is p2

Performance modes
P8 = idle clock speeds and lowest power consumption
P2 = the default mode used when your PC boots or no drivers are installed.
P0 = Gaming/Load. This mode only accepts boost/offset values

Did you build it yourself? Use cuda 6.5 and not cuda 7.0 or 7.5

-i 22.9 seems to help gotten it back close, I had already tried -i 23 before posting. I'll try tweaking it a little more.
Card hardly ever gets over mid 50c so heat or throttling is not a problem. Yes have cuda 6.5 in use. W7 64bit per your .exe file.
Almost all my rigs are open air bench setups, so heat is not much of a problem with anything with the AC running Wink

pallas

legendary

Activity: 2716

Merit: 1094

Black Belt Developer

My cards stay in P2 while mining (there is no X server running).
If I set persistance mode, they go to P8 when idle.
I think they are mining fine (using power boost, throttling, getting as near TDL as possible, etc.), but maybe with P0 they can hash more? What's your experience?
Thanks!

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2954

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

Quote from: lawrencelyl on August 10, 2015, 06:58:07 AM

sp, good work! Just sent some beers to you Wink

Thanks for your support

More beers for me.

@wolf: cheers.

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2954

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

This is quark right?

try -i 22.9 (the default for 750ti)

Do you have more than one card in the rig? Is the card trottling? Check the temperature, if it reaches 70 degress c it will automaticly downclock,. Also make sure your card is in the p0 state. Defalt is p2

Performance modes
P8 = idle clock speeds and lowest power consumption
P2 = the default mode used when your PC boots or no drivers are installed.
P0 = Gaming/Load. This mode only accepts boost/offset values

Did you build it yourself? Use cuda 6.5 and not cuda 7.0 or 7.5

zTheWolfz

full member

Activity: 231

Merit: 150

Seeing a bit of a loss on 59 over 57 on the 960 as well. -i 22 used with both and has been the best -i from 54 onward until now for this card.
I tried -X and couldn't find anything that made it any better then -i 22.
I'll test a little more and see if there is a better spot for the new release.

57

Code:

accepted: 51/51 (100.00%), 10024 khash/s yay!!!
GPU #0: GeForce GTX 960, 10131
accepted: 52/52 (100.00%), 10023 khash/s yay!!!

59

Code:

accepted: 41/41 (100.00%), 9809 kH/s yes!

pallas

legendary

Activity: 2716

Merit: 1094

Black Belt Developer

Quote from: facanferff on August 10, 2015, 07:37:21 AM

Using a Nvidia GTX 850M it seems to me that the latest commits (that include neoscrypt improvements) only slowed it down...
I used the same configuration (-i 13) to run it with release 57 and 59 and the results were the following:

Release 57:

Quote

accepted: 1/1 (100.00%), 121.46 khash/s yay!!!

Release 59:

Quote

accepted: 1/1 (100.00%), 56.50 kH/s yes!

I only show here 1 accept, but other accepts are consistent with these.

As you can see it slowed very much, there's a reason for this?

I didn't change the launch configs nor the thread number nor default intensity, but what about other intensty values? Do they all give a lower hashrate?
I changed so many things in the code that it's not easy to understant if/what change might have worsen hashrate for that card, without having the card itself to test with.

facanferff

newbie

Activity: 8

Merit: 0

Using a Nvidia GTX 850M it seems to me that the latest commits (that include neoscrypt improvements) only slowed it down...
I used the same configuration (-i 13) to run it with release 57 and 59 and the results were the following:

Release 57:

Quote

accepted: 1/1 (100.00%), 121.46 khash/s yay!!!

Release 59:

Quote

accepted: 1/1 (100.00%), 56.50 kH/s yes!

I only show here 1 accept, but other accepts are consistent with these.

As you can see it slowed very much, there's a reason for this?

lawrencelyl

member

Activity: 94

Merit: 10

sp, good work! Just sent some beers to you Wink

Topic: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell / Pascal kernels. - page 1010. (Read 2347601 times)