Topic: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell / Pascal kernels. - page 591. (Read 2347641 times)

@Nikolaj: Which exact model of ZOTAC is that you have , mate: https://www.zotac.com/product/graphics_card/gtx-970/all
If I know right - ZOTAC is te brand with the most OverClockable cards ,which I wish to take a hand on...

Thanks for the tip. I had been testing the waters on lbry but need to sit down and oc again.
Recently formatted and reset everything to stock.
Zzz..

They do at least 300 units on lbry. Do the math.

Lots of fire in this thread lately. Haven't been around. My 2x 970s worth mining on nowadays?

Thank you, go6ooo1212!
Your info is very useful.

Afterburner 106% gpuz 123.2%?

You can't just throw a completely different configuration at a different benchmark and compare the two. The whole reason I asked him for a screenshot running Epsylons. I have 970s and have also ran Epsylons, it's not the same thing.

Reference 970 @ 1505 MHz, tpruvot 1.8.1, maximum frequency. 20MHz more it crashes


The tolerance of the frequency could be related to the chip itself, to evaluate the overclocking headroom we should at least compare with the same miner on the same settings and VGA, with at least 3 measurements and average readings. ASIC quality 64%, so technically speaking a lower average frequency (I've got a custom liquid cooler).

With the same frequency it should be almost the same result, because of there's a gap of 86.5MHz on the core.

+15% should be 185.51 MH/s. The interesting thing it's the TDP amount on GPUz, I should test with the wattmeter with the 2 kernels because it seems that it's less stressful than tpruvot 1.8.1

Yeah you have to downclock quite a bit for Epsylons compared to other miners, not sure exactly why. It pays off though.

If you drag that power limit slider all the way to the right and memory all left?

-edit- Sorry, with sp_ miner

Epsylon's crashing the driver with such clock.

Include a photo of the same setup running Epsylons?

So I share some result with my other 970s ( more OCed) MSI_Gaming and Palit Jetstream...

WTF are you talking about? He literally said there was a 10-15% improvement and people have been confirming it the last couple pages, including a guy on this page.

So Maxwell doesn't count now? You're trying to make a moving target here. He literally specified that line of cards.

No one knows what you 'care about' until you mention it. It's not my responsibility to read your mind or type out your responses for you.

That aside, I have no idea why you think 10-15% improvement isn't also possible on Pascal, it's very similar to Maxwell and pretty much all other algos except for weird ones (like Ethereum) show about the same improvements from Maxwell to Pascal (around 90%).

My lbry kernel sp-mod #1 is faster on most maxwell cards(compute 5.2). The pascal kernel is not done yet. I belive I can do 10-15% on the pascal as well if I have time. Your contibutions well help me to finance the job.. I will use 100 hours++ on this. The fee miner can help me to reduce the amout of work I do in my 100% position as a programmer, and spend the time to optimize your future profits instead.

SP_ likes quick cash, who does not, be careful.

you are telling me that i'm talking about assumtions and speculation, when there is no guarantee either that it can be improved, nice argument you have there, you are contraddicting yourself

actually it's the opposite, there is no proof that it can be improvement with a great % of optimization

and no he didn't improve anything beyond 1-2%, he was talking about maxwell card(and i don't care about to be honest), not pascal, read again what he said

How is 'regurgitating', which is a word, make a retarded sentence? ...not usually going to harp on spelling either, but 'sentece' isn't one... Web browsers even have built in spellcheck now.

So because SP said the code was already good, he's incapable of improving on something good? Use a bit of logic. You're talking assumptions and hypothesize instead of fact once again. Something can be 'good' and still improve on it... Completely putting aside the fact that he said he DID improve on it and other people already confirmed he did... Yet instead you choose to randomly believe what a low level hate poster in the thread threw out there... and regurgitated it back up with no forethought or critical thinking.

If telling you to take time to read things before you write ill thought replies is 'attention seeking'... err I mean 'seek for attention' then I guess I am it. I also don't like people harping on one of the good devs around here, as in case you missed it, there are only a handful of them, even less willing to actually work on something that has a lot of meaning to miners.

I do agree it should be a flat fee or a miner fee, not both, pretty much all the other responses he got to his miner here were undeserved.



Just as a FYI, Lbry is once again earning less then ETH+SIA. It has been for the last couple days. Even with a 10% improvement it still wont be making more then ETH+SIA.

Just a heads up as everyone loves running things into the ground without looking at hard to see mining profit.

Five months ago mining solo meant mining alone against the rest of the network, today it means mining eth only with clay's miner.

Sp, you will get my 0.1btc if btceur touches 508 today on kraken.

you don't even follow, just shooting retarded sentece like "regurgitating" and crap like that, sp said himself that the code is already good enough and it is hard to improve it

so unless he can pull of a miracle his miner is not worth it for pascal, not sure what the hell we are arguing about, you are as usual the one making random claim just to begin a flaim

it seems like you are that one guy that always seek for attention