Author

Topic: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell / Pascal kernels. - page 1077. (Read 2347601 times)

sp_
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer

Thanks:) I think I should spend some more time on quark.. to low tdp on the highend cards
legendary
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1114
hi all ...

has anyone any issues with compiling since sp introduced compute_52 into the makefile? ...

sp - the compile crashes with - nvcc fatal   : Unsupported gpu architecture 'compute_52' - since you introduced the compute_52 arch into git ...

even if you comment out the option in the makefile - the compilation bombs out with - config.status: error: cannot find input file: `Makefile.in' ...

could you 'fix' this please? ...

#crysx

Guess you missed this post....

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.11475406

If you only have 750s you don't need compute_52. As SP pointed out compute_52 will give
better performance on 9xx cards.
legendary
Activity: 1154
Merit: 1001
@bensam1231

I have the 980's undervolted, which has so far proven to provide about the same stability ceiling, while driving less power and heat (so yeah, I'd expect that overvolting would tend to lower the efficiency). Standard voltage at top clock bin is 1.125v IIRC, while mine are running at 1.112v.
I don't have any 750's anymore, but I do recall those behaving very differently. The ones I had before, would allow quite a bit more overclocking if also running overvolted - but on those - I was not bound by thermal or TDP limitations (which I am on the 980s). 

The issue with running the cards very hot (near the specification limits) is not one of killing the cards in an instant. They are certainly designed to manage the temperatures for long periods of time (hence the thermal throttling). The issue is that, cards that always run hot, will tend to have a shorter lifetime than those than always run cool.
Manufacturers are also not stupid. They will be happy to have a good number of cards failing after some 4 or 5 years of abuse, so they can sell some new ones  Grin

@SP_
980 @ 1370, 3505 - quark
   release 44 - 19.2MH/s
   release 51 - 19.5MH/s
legendary
Activity: 1764
Merit: 1024
Curiously are you guys overvolting too? Overvolting usually results in worse efficiency.

The 290/x series were designed to operate at up to 95c at which point the fan ramps up to whatever your maximum threshold is and once it reaches whatever you set the maximum to it starts downclocking to stay under 95c. AMD said they were perfectly alright operating at those temperatures. That was what they were engineered to do. That doesn't apply to 280/x series though. The conception that it's 'too hot' is based on what people know about other GPUs besides those.

For gaming but not for 24/7 heavy use.

That is incorrect. It includes render farms, which can be just as strenuous as mining. 'Gaming' is a very loose term as well, some games push cards harder then others. They wouldn't make such a statement based off using the card for 1-2 hours at those temps. They were designed to run at that temperature. It's not magic, you can engineer something to run at whatever you want, you just have to use components that work at higher temperatures.
sp_
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
Just use the old makefile. Or remove the +
legendary
Activity: 2912
Merit: 1091
--- ChainWorks Industries ---
hi all ...

has anyone any issues with compiling since sp introduced compute_52 into the makefile? ...

sp - the compile crashes with - nvcc fatal   : Unsupported gpu architecture 'compute_52' - since you introduced the compute_52 arch into git ...

even if you comment out the option in the makefile - the compilation bombs out with - config.status: error: cannot find input file: `Makefile.in' ...

could you 'fix' this please? ...

#crysx
member
Activity: 75
Merit: 10
release 50
gtx 980 -  lyra2 -i 21 @nicehash 1325  
              quark -i 24 @nicehash  19500

release 51
gtx 980 - lyra2 -i 21 @nicehash 1325
              qiark -i 24 @nicehash 19200


temp of card.. it seems to me the mfg wanted this card to run hot... I will crank up the fan speed a bit and try and get in the 75ºc gpu1 and gpu2 will probably drop to 72ºC but any more and my wife will complain
full member
Activity: 145
Merit: 101
How to mine scrypt-jane with this miner? For example nfactor=15. Old cudaminer work fine with my 750Ti rig, but with this miner i have errors. Need other parameters?
full member
Activity: 139
Merit: 100
The 750ti use around 40 watt. the 970 around 140 watt.. But..
You need to add the idle watt, and messure with a gold rated PSU or bether. With a cheap PSU the wattage is increased.

Thank you. I found a tomshardware page that mesured the idle power usage at 20W (and the "torture" at 243W), so 160W total on quark. Nice!
I think it is the first time 970 beats 750 on a H/€ AND H/W comparison.

BTW, I removed one 750Ti (windforce OC) from my rig and the power consumption difference is exactly 60W from the wall, on a 80plus gold PSU.

edit: just did the math and 970 are still worth with insane 1200+ platinum PSUs...
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1050
I know I can google it and find links, but what procedure do you guys recommend for flashing a higher TDP BIOS?

My card is a Zotac GTX 970 ZT-90101-10P

I am about to put a waterblock on it and then I want to flash a different BIOS, raising the max power limit.

Thanks in advance, and a BIG thank you to sp_. A donation in appreciation from me is forthcoming.
http://www.overclock.net/t/1514085/official-nvidia-gtx-970-owners-club/10#post_22876454
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 502
I know I can google it and find links, but what procedure do you guys recommend for flashing a higher TDP BIOS?

My card is a Zotac GTX 970 ZT-90101-10P

I am about to put a waterblock on it and then I want to flash a different BIOS, raising the max power limit.

Thanks in advance, and a BIG thank you to sp_. A donation in appreciation from me is forthcoming.
sp_
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
speeds build 51 (factory standard clocks)
quark:
gtx 970(gigabyte oc): 16.200 MHASH (up from 15.700 in build 50)
gtx 750ti(gigabyte windforce): 5,7 MHASH
Do you have power consumption metrics for these? Specifically the 970. I'm trying to decide if they are worth it or if I should stick to 750 Tis...

The 750ti use around 40 watt. the 970 around 140 watt.. But..
You need to add the idle watt, and messure with a gold rated PSU or bether. With a cheap PSU the wattage is increased.
full member
Activity: 139
Merit: 100
speeds build 51 (factory standard clocks)

quark:
gtx 970(gigabyte oc): 16.200 MHASH (up from 15.700 in build 50)
gtx 750ti(gigabyte windforce): 5,7 MHASH

Do you have power consumption metrics for these? Specifically the 970. I'm trying to decide if they are worth it or if I should stick to 750 Tis...
legendary
Activity: 1400
Merit: 1050
newer number for lyra:
gtx980:   1990kh/s
gtx750ti: 1140kh/s
gtx780ti: 2787kh/s (lol doesn't seem to want to stop increasing...)

I suspect you have done something like:

1. Reduced the register count
2. changed launchconfig like in cudaminer/the cryptonight miner -l 8x60 etc.

am I right?

no, I never really looked at the launch config as it is done in cudaminer or cryptonight.
Actually, it is a full rewrite of lyra2
legendary
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1114
Quark seeing 6120 KH/s, up from 6050, on EVGA GTX750ti SC LP no aux pwr, default clocks and ccminer parms, Centos 6.

I noticed you don't include sm52 in the makefile. Any particular reason?

He didnt wrote this part. sm52 is not supported in official Cuda 6.5 (They made a special 6.5.19 at the 970/980 release date)

Due to bugs in Cuda 7.0 related to our code.... we stay on that and sm52 is not enabled by default

In case anyone gets tripped up with sm52 here's a link to cuda 6.5 with 9xx support.

https://developer.nvidia.com/cuda-downloads-geforce-gtx9xx
legendary
Activity: 1484
Merit: 1082
ccminer/cpuminer developer
Quark seeing 6120 KH/s, up from 6050, on EVGA GTX750ti SC LP no aux pwr, default clocks and ccminer parms, Centos 6.

I noticed you don't include sm52 in the makefile. Any particular reason?

He didnt wrote this part. sm52 is not supported in official Cuda 6.5 (They made a special 6.5.19 at the 970/980 release date)

Due to bugs in Cuda 7.0 related to our code.... we stay on that and sm52 is not enabled by default
sp_
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
It will use less power, but run slower. (if you run compute 5.0 builds on compute 5.2 cards)

I added 5.2 to the makefile now..

My mod is optimized for 32bit and wondows, but I try to keep the linux compability.
legendary
Activity: 1470
Merit: 1114
Quark seeing 6120 KH/s, up from 6050, on EVGA GTX750ti SC LP no aux pwr, default clocks and ccminer parms, Centos 6.

I noticed you don't include sm52 in the makefile. Any particular reason?

Add this to the makefile:

nvcc_ARCH += -gencode=arch=compute_52,code=\"sm_52,compute_52\"

you could try to only compile for 52. On old drivers it was faster to compile for 52 only than for 50 and 52 mixed

Thanks, I already compile for 35/50/52. Compile time is not a concern of mine. I was just wondering if you
had a specific reason for leaving it out, Seems not.
sp_
legendary
Activity: 2926
Merit: 1087
Team Black developer
Quark seeing 6120 KH/s, up from 6050, on EVGA GTX750ti SC LP no aux pwr, default clocks and ccminer parms, Centos 6.

I noticed you don't include sm52 in the makefile. Any particular reason?

Add this to the makefile:

nvcc_ARCH += -gencode=arch=compute_52,code=\"sm_52,compute_52\"

you could try to only compile for 52. On old drivers it was faster to compile for 52 only than for 50 and 52 mixed
Jump to: