CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell / Pascal kernels. - page 1054.

bensam1231

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1024

Quote from: sp_ on June 22, 2015, 06:38:31 AM

Quote from: jpouza on June 22, 2015, 06:31:55 AM

Quote from: sp_ on June 22, 2015, 06:21:12 AM

Quote from: jpouza on June 22, 2015, 06:09:57 AM

I miss a lot my ccminer times, now electricity is so expensive here in Brazil, tks to corrupted politicians and a crazy government Sad

My 980s and 970 now are set only to run games sporadically.

Mining is more profitable than ever if you know what to mine.
3x 980 and 1x 970 will give you around 75MHASH of quark. (sp-mod 53 light overclock)
Around (0,04BTC per day) (10USD per day) should be enough to cover your bills.

Hi sp_!
I still remember the good times on Spreadminer and X11 optimizations! Good memories!
Interesting, Quark is placed at 35th on the market, costing about 2k satoshis each...with 10 USD/day I get a good profit (about 140 USD/month), but there are electricity penalties for those who "abuse" of it here, it´s called red flag state, it is a pitty. Sad

Cheers

not only quark the coin, but quark the algo.. Google sharkcoin, dimecoin,securecoin etc. Alot of profitable coins.

or just mine at nicehash. They pay around 0.45BTC per GHASH now..

Quark is pooping out, as I mentioned a few days ago, all the algos are currently taking a dip. It could be because people are trying to ride BTC as it increases instead of mining.

Grout

full member

Activity: 139

Merit: 100

Quote from: sp_ on June 22, 2015, 06:38:31 AM

or just mine at nicehash. They pay around 0.45BTC per GHASH now..

0.29 right now. What the hell is happening with quark coins? Time to investigate...

tbearhere

legendary

Activity: 3164

Merit: 1003

Quote from: CapnBDL on June 21, 2015, 03:24:30 AM

<> <> <>

  YAAMP POOL OWNER CALLS IT QUITS YAAMP POOL OWNER CALLS IT QUITS YAAMP POOL OWNER CALLS IT QUITS

   <> <> <>

   This has been a special announcement by CapnBDL Cool

Good

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

Quote from: jpouza on June 22, 2015, 06:31:55 AM

Quote from: sp_ on June 22, 2015, 06:21:12 AM

Quote from: jpouza on June 22, 2015, 06:09:57 AM

I miss a lot my ccminer times, now electricity is so expensive here in Brazil, tks to corrupted politicians and a crazy government Sad

My 980s and 970 now are set only to run games sporadically.

Mining is more profitable than ever if you know what to mine.
3x 980 and 1x 970 will give you around 75MHASH of quark. (sp-mod 53 light overclock)
Around (0,04BTC per day) (10USD per day) should be enough to cover your bills.

Hi sp_!
I still remember the good times on Spreadminer and X11 optimizations! Good memories!
Interesting, Quark is placed at 35th on the market, costing about 2k satoshis each...with 10 USD/day I get a good profit (about 140 USD/month), but there are electricity penalties for those who "abuse" of it here, it´s called red flag state, it is a pitty. Sad

Cheers

not only quark the coin, but quark the algo.. Google sharkcoin, dimecoin,securecoin etc. Alot of profitable coins.

or just mine at nicehash. They pay around 0.45BTC per GHASH now..

jpouza

legendary

Activity: 2716

Merit: 1116

Quote from: sp_ on June 22, 2015, 06:21:12 AM

Quote from: jpouza on June 22, 2015, 06:09:57 AM

I miss a lot my ccminer times, now electricity is so expensive here in Brazil, tks to corrupted politicians and a crazy government Sad

My 980s and 970 now are set only to run games sporadically.

Mining is more profitable than ever if you know what to mine.

3x 980 and 1x 970 will give you around 75MHASH of quark. (sp-mod 53 light overclock)

Around (0,04BTC per day) (10USD per day) should be enough to cover your bills.

Hi sp_!

I still remember the good times on Spreadminer and X11 optimizations! Good memories!

Interesting, Quark is placed at 35th on the market, costing about 2k satoshis each...with 10 USD/day I get a good profit (about 140 USD/month), but there are electricity penalties for those who "abuse" of it here, it´s called red flag state, it is a pitty. Sad

Cheers

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

Quote from: jpouza on June 22, 2015, 06:09:57 AM

I miss a lot my ccminer times, now electricity is so expensive here in Brazil, tks to corrupted politicians and a crazy government Sad

My 980s and 970 now are set only to run games sporadically.

Mining is more profitable than ever if you know what to mine.

3x 980 and 1x 970 will give you around 75MHASH of quark. (sp-mod 53 light overclock)

Around (0,04BTC per day) (10USD per day) should be enough to cover your bills.

I expect the power usage of your rig to be around 700W? then you use 16,8 KWATTh per day

If your power cost is over $0.59 per KWh, you loose money.. Normally in other countries (your competition) the powercost is around $0.05-0.20 per KWh

jpouza

legendary

Activity: 2716

Merit: 1116

I miss a lot my ccminer times, now electricity is so expensive here in Brazil, tks to corrupted politicians and a crazy government Sad

My 980s and 970 now are set only to run games sporadically.

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

Quote from: djm34 on June 22, 2015, 03:23:18 AM

huh ? it is based on your version... (1.5.50) and incorporate that changes already, so whatever is the original speed this one does 30kh/s more

but the speed should be higher than 150-160 on default clocks try with -i 14.5. (windows x86 builds)

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

Quote from: joblo on June 21, 2015, 01:50:55 PM

Quote from: scryptr on June 21, 2015, 12:21:21 PM

Another thing, in mining Lyra2 my GTX 960 cards mine more slowly than a 750ti. I don't understand it. I think there may have been another post on this 10-20 pages back, but this thread is getting long.

--scryptr

It seems lyra2 is memory bound. Unless the 960 has more memory I wouldn't expect a big increase, but I
wouldn't expect a decrease either.

Try to reduce the intensity with the -i parameter. I think the 960 is using the same default intensities as on the 970 and the 980 wich is too high.

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

Quote from: rednoW on May 03, 2015, 02:05:56 PM

2 sp_
Tried your #49 with neoscrypt

I tried djm's version before and for my poor gtx 750 1gb it runs only with -F 1 and gives 175khs.

Default run with your #49
start /realtime ccminer.exe --cpu-priority 5 -a neoscrypt

it takes almost all gpu memory and pushes load to "Bus interface" as it called in GPU-Z.
With such conditions performance is poor - only 45 khs.
But i tried to play with -i parameter and found that it runs with maximum -i 14.5
With such config it shows 810MB memory usage, 0% bus interface load, 99% gpu load, 30-35% memory controller load.
The numbers are 187khs and this is better then old djm's version. But i didn't check on the pool yet Wink

.

So I think you should use not so heavy default launch config for this algo for low-level gpu's like mine.

Could you try release 53 please. Is perfomance lost?

djm34

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1050

Quote from: sp_ on June 22, 2015, 01:44:58 AM

Quote from: djm34 on June 21, 2015, 08:26:35 PM

Quote from: scryptr on June 21, 2015, 07:50:14 PM

RELEASE 1.53--
I get 10.45Mh/s on my GTX 960 SSC mining quark. This is with the intensity at 24, and an overclock of +80/240, core/mem. Intensities of 24.1 or higher fail on launch, and most often crash the driver.
I was getting 10.6Mh/s with -i 23.7, and OC of +100/300, core/mem, but it became unstable in the last few versions.
The Lyra2 perfomance really puzzles me, though. It should run faster than a 750ti. --scryptr

you should monitor FB usage (Frame Buffer) with msi ab, if it is too high, then you should decrease the intensity.
A rule of thumb for the intensity is to get it to 99~100% gpu usage (starting with lower value obviously) and stops when you reach 99% there is no point in pushing it higher.
Some progress with neoscrypt:
750ti: 186kh/s (was 150~160)
780ti: 430kh/s (was ~350)
980 735kh/s (was ~650)

sp-mod 53 is doing 190Kh/s on the 750 (non ti) with overclocking.

my blake rewrite added 15-20KHASH from your first public version.

huh ? it is based on your version... (1.5.50) and incorporate that changes already, so whatever is the original speed this one does 30kh/s more

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

Quote from: djm34 on June 21, 2015, 08:26:35 PM

Quote from: scryptr on June 21, 2015, 07:50:14 PM

RELEASE 1.53--
I get 10.45Mh/s on my GTX 960 SSC mining quark. This is with the intensity at 24, and an overclock of +80/240, core/mem. Intensities of 24.1 or higher fail on launch, and most often crash the driver.
I was getting 10.6Mh/s with -i 23.7, and OC of +100/300, core/mem, but it became unstable in the last few versions.
The Lyra2 perfomance really puzzles me, though. It should run faster than a 750ti. --scryptr

you should monitor FB usage (Frame Buffer) with msi ab, if it is too high, then you should decrease the intensity.
A rule of thumb for the intensity is to get it to 99~100% gpu usage (starting with lower value obviously) and stops when you reach 99% there is no point in pushing it higher.
Some progress with neoscrypt:
750ti: 186kh/s (was 150~160)
780ti: 430kh/s (was ~350)
980 735kh/s (was ~650)

sp-mod 53 is doing 190Kh/s on the 750 (non ti) with overclocking.

my blake rewrite added 15-20KHASH from your first public version.

MaxDZ8

hero member

Activity: 672

Merit: 500

I've stopped following NV a couple of years ago so take it with some salt...

As far as I've understood, the ALU-to-memory resource ratios in small maxwell are much more appropriate to efficient memory usage. Approximated: there are more "memory ports" compared to ALU count. What could be happening is that big GPUs ALUs are tripping on each other. Very approximated: every ALU has "more chance" to get to memory.
It is also possible to reproduce this on GCN1.0 (which has quite smaller buffers BTW).

Try measure the amount of memory effectively moved. I'd expect it to be much bigger for big maxwell and in both cases far higher than it should.

As a side note: "memory load" is unlikely to be what you think it is. It's most likely "memory controller active"; it could be active but stalled (~ shut down but burning energy).

scryptr

legendary

Activity: 1797

Merit: 1028

Quote from: bathrobehero on June 21, 2015, 08:40:51 PM

Quote from: scryptr on June 21, 2015, 07:50:14 PM

RELEASE 1.53--

I get 10.45Mh/s on my GTX 960 SSC mining quark. This is with the intensity at 24, and an overclock of +80/240, core/mem. Intensities of 24.1 or higher fail on launch, and most often crash the driver.

I was getting 10.6Mh/s with -i 23.7, and OC of +100/300, core/mem, but it became unstable in the last few versions.

The Lyra2 performance really puzzles me, though. It should run faster than a 750ti. --scryptr

Does the memory overclock help at all?

Lyra2 and GTX960--

My Lyra2 rig has 5x 750ti SC, and one GTX 960 FTW (4GB). I can overclock all cards with nVidia Inspector and get bigger numbers, on Win 8.0, but the rig isn't stable. At stock clocks, the 750ti cards get 725kh/s, and the 960 gets 500-600kh/s. Memory overclock helped some, but the rig would not run more than a few hours. The 960 runs like a lame dog either way.

With stock clocks, the rig runs for days on Lyra2. --scryptr

bathrobehero

legendary

Activity: 2002

Merit: 1051

ICO? Not even once.

Quote from: scryptr on June 21, 2015, 07:50:14 PM

RELEASE 1.53--

I get 10.45Mh/s on my GTX 960 SSC mining quark. This is with the intensity at 24, and an overclock of +80/240, core/mem. Intensities of 24.1 or higher fail on launch, and most often crash the driver.

I was getting 10.6Mh/s with -i 23.7, and OC of +100/300, core/mem, but it became unstable in the last few versions.

The Lyra2 perfomance really puzzles me, though. It should run faster than a 750ti. --scryptr

Does the memory overclock help at all?

antonio8

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1000

Quote from: scryptr on June 21, 2015, 07:50:14 PM

RELEASE 1.53--

I get 10.45Mh/s on my GTX 960 SSC mining quark. This is with the intensity at 24, and an overclock of +80/240, core/mem. Intensities of 24.1 or higher fail on launch, and most often crash the driver.

I was getting 10.6Mh/s with -i 23.7, and OC of +100/300, core/mem, but it became unstable in the last few versions.

The Lyra2 perfomance really puzzles me, though. It should run faster than a 750ti. --scryptr

I have the same issue. I have a Evga GTX960 SSC 4GB and it is slower than my 750ti SC 2GB. I am on Windows 7 64 bit.

djm34

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1050

Quote from: scryptr on June 21, 2015, 07:50:14 PM

RELEASE 1.53--

I get 10.45Mh/s on my GTX 960 SSC mining quark. This is with the intensity at 24, and an overclock of +80/240, core/mem. Intensities of 24.1 or higher fail on launch, and most often crash the driver.

I was getting 10.6Mh/s with -i 23.7, and OC of +100/300, core/mem, but it became unstable in the last few versions.

The Lyra2 perfomance really puzzles me, though. It should run faster than a 750ti. --scryptr

you should monitor FB usage (Frame Buffer) with msi ab, if it is too high, then you should decrease the intensity.
A rule of thumb for the intensity is to get it to 99~100% gpu usage (starting with lower value obviously) and stops when you reach 99% there is no point in pushing it higher.

Some progress with neoscrypt:
750ti: 186kh/s (was 150~160)
780ti: 430kh/s (was ~350)
980 735kh/s (was ~650)

scryptr

legendary

Activity: 1797

Merit: 1028

RELEASE 1.53--

I get 10.45Mh/s on my GTX 960 SSC mining quark. This is with the intensity at 24, and an overclock of +80/240, core/mem. Intensities of 24.1 or higher fail on launch, and most often crash the driver.

I was getting 10.6Mh/s with -i 23.7, and OC of +100/300, core/mem, but it became unstable in the last few versions.

The Lyra2 perfomance really puzzles me, though. It should run faster than a 750ti. --scryptr

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2926

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

Quote from: scryptr on June 21, 2015, 12:21:21 PM

RELEASE 1.53--
I haven't posted in a while, I was disapointed with releases 1.51 and 1.52. Both would run, but crash over time on both my Linux and Win 7 machines. Release 1.53 runs smoothly enough on my Win 7 GTX 960, mining Quark. However, I don't see any significant change in hashing speed since v1.50, my fallback.
I think it was the reduction in default intensity that made things better. Perhaps SP_ could provide default intensity info for the different algos, and we could each find the top intensity for our own rigs by adjusting from the default.
Another thing, in mining Lyra2 my GTX 960 cards mine more slowly than a 750ti. I don't understand it. I think there may have been another post on this 10-20 pages back, but this thread is getting long.

--scryptr

I have 2 970 test cards. 1 gigabyte windforce oc (8pin + 6pin power), and one zotec

The zotec have 2 6pins power connectors, and only 2 fans. (almost half the size of the gigabyte card.

The gigabyte does 15.8 MHASH with -i 24
the zotec starts at 14.5 MHASH and after a while the gpu is trottleing (to hot) and the speed is reduced to 13.7 MHASH..

in the latest on github I have reduced the default intensity to 22.9 for compute 5.2. Seems to be a mistake, since I am loosing 300kHASH on the gigabyte card. On the zotec card it seems to improve a bit with lower intensity (less trottleing)

scryptr

legendary

Activity: 1797

Merit: 1028

Quote from: joblo on June 21, 2015, 01:50:55 PM

Quote from: scryptr on June 21, 2015, 12:21:21 PM

Another thing, in mining Lyra2 my GTX 960 cards mine more slowly than a 750ti. I don't understand it. I think there may have been another post on this 10-20 pages back, but this thread is getting long.

--scryptr

It seems lyra2 is memory bound. Unless the 960 has more memory I wouldn't expect a big increase, but I
wouldn't expect a decrease either.

I have a 4GB GTX 960 FTW and a 2GB GTX 960 SSC, both run lame compared to a 750ti when mining Lyra2. --scryptr

Topic: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell / Pascal kernels. - page 1054. (Read 2347601 times)