PASCAL GPU RELEASED
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/nvidia-pascal-tesla-p100-gpu,31557.html#xtor=EPR-8886
Topic: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell / Pascal kernels. - page 702. (Read 2347641 times)
the only fair conditions to compare miners is at the same power usage.
at the end of the story, it's efficiency that counts, not "maximum speed".
so just set a low tdp and see which one is faster.
at the end of the story, it's efficiency that counts, not "maximum speed".
so just set a low tdp and see which one is faster.
But If my version can run stable @ 100mhz more, then my version is 6% faster.
And if my miner can run stable and fast with -i 31.9 and his version is crashing, then it's not fair to compare both of them with -i 25.
Comparison should always be at base clocks with like parameters. Apple to apples. All hardware can not take the same overclocks. My 2 cents.
WE ARE NOT IN A HIGH OCTANE DRAG RACE--
Speak for yourself. I used to own a 1970 Camaro Z28 LT1 360 HP, Just like this one, same colour too.
http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/lostpedia/images/b/b5/Hurley%27s_Camaro_fully_restored.JPG/revision/latest?cb=20080516223037
COOL PIC, BRO! --
But did it mine AltCoin? BTW, A Dodge SuperBee with a six-pac carburetor (I think it was a dealer option) could go through a tank of 25-cent-a-gallon gas driving from one small town to the next. I was able to look at pictures in the weekly student science magazine ads. Gas was practically frre, I guess. My first car cost $35. --scryptr
OOOH Hemi!
That pic is from the Lost TV show, I freaked when I saw it on TV. It's rare enough I thought it might be mine.
Most are fakes with a cut front bumper or full bumper, no nose extension, cat's eye front signals and large 3 piece rear spoiler.
Real ones have a real two piece front bumper, nose extension, round front signals and a small one piece rear spoiler.
The web page hosting the pic also has pics of a fake used in the car chase scenes on the show. I have to say I bought my
dream car youg. Now I drive a Nissan Micra.
Back to mining, profit is tumbling, but lyra2 is still hot for CPU miners, though perhaps not to Pallas' efficiency standards.
WE ARE NOT IN A HIGH OCTANE DRAG RACE--
Speak for yourself. I used to own a 1970 Camaro Z28 LT1 360 HP, Just like this one, same colour too.
http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/lostpedia/images/b/b5/Hurley%27s_Camaro_fully_restored.JPG/revision/latest?cb=20080516223037
COOL PIC, BRO! --
But did it mine AltCoin? BTW, A Dodge SuperBee with a six-pac carburetor (I think it was a dealer option) could go through a tank of 25-cent-a-gallon gas driving from one small town to the next. I was able to look at pictures in the weekly student science magazine ads. Gas was practically frre, I guess. My first car cost $35. --scryptr
Just tested the Alexei miner. He is not submitting all the found solutions to the pool. (only one nonce per warp) This meens lower hashrates on low difficulties. Managed to gain 10MHASH on the gtx960M. Release 9 (alexus sp-mod) will be sendt to the decred donators.
Sendt.
Report your hashrates. I have only tested it on the gtx960M (768 cuda cores)
Sendt.
Report your hashrates. I have only tested it on the gtx960M (768 cuda cores)
WE ARE NOT IN A HIGH OCTANE DRAG RACE--
Speak for yourself. I used to own a 1970 Camaro Z28 LT1 360 HP, Just like this one, same colour too.
http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/lostpedia/images/b/b5/Hurley%27s_Camaro_fully_restored.JPG/revision/latest?cb=20080516223037
its like saying that feul efficiency IS the factor in high octane drag races ... its not - its the time it takes to get from one point to another - and the fastest wins ... period ... they dont care how much feul or noise or rubber is used or destroyed in the process ...
that's because they have a wide margin.
everybody must take expenses into account.
if you made more money by lowering your TDP, wouldn't you do it?
do the math and you'll see.
agreed ...
expense IS a factor IF the result takes it into account ... if all you want is more hashrate at the expense of power - then great ...
i will concede though that in a larger farm environment - this view would be the deciding factor for the farm and its design and setup - as the smallest decrease in power would save a huge amount ...
but in this case pallas - i honestly dont think the power reduction is that great that it would be anything to worry about - especially if thehasrate is increased by a larger margin ... not a very small one ...
as for money - im not fussed on that end ... it comes good in the end when it comes to money ... im more concerned with the coins themselves ... more hash - more coin ...
hence the reason why i have always said - that my view of 'profitability' is VERY different form what most people accept it to be ...
#crysx
By definition power is a variable in efficiency. But as crysx said many people don't care. The bottom line is to state whether
power efficiency or raw hashrate is being specified. Otherwise we could end up in a false argument, and we already have
enough real arguments.
Hash/watt is what you're looking for. It's entirely possible to get the same speeds with two different miners only one uses less power.
It definitely sounds like someone is getting free power though. When things start getting squeezed, you and everyone else will definitely care about efficiency. May I remind you guys in January we were getting about $1 revenue per day per 970... or $.5 if you include power where I live. Especially now days with the Eth boom over and everything dwindling, the hash is starting to leak out everywhere. Depending on how far Eth drops will determine where things will bottom out.
its like saying that feul efficiency IS the factor in high octane drag races ... its not - its the time it takes to get from one point to another - and the fastest wins ... period ... they dont care how much feul or noise or rubber is used or destroyed in the process ...
that's because they have a wide margin.
everybody must take expenses into account.
if you made more money by lowering your TDP, wouldn't you do it?
do the math and you'll see.
agreed ...
expense IS a factor IF the result takes it into account ... if all you want is more hashrate at the expense of power - then great ...
i will concede though that in a larger farm environment - this view would be the deciding factor for the farm and its design and setup - as the smallest decrease in power would save a huge amount ...
but in this case pallas - i honestly dont think the power reduction is that great that it would be anything to worry about - especially if thehasrate is increased by a larger margin ... not a very small one ...
as for money - im not fussed on that end ... it comes good in the end when it comes to money ... im more concerned with the coins themselves ... more hash - more coin ...
hence the reason why i have always said - that my view of 'profitability' is VERY different form what most people accept it to be ...
#crysx
By definition power is a variable in efficiency. But as crysx said many people don't care. The bottom line is to state whether
power efficiency or raw hashrate is being specified. Otherwise we could end up in a false argument, and we already have
enough real arguments.
Eth gives me (0.4 eth) or 3.9$ day(diff grow) 970 doing 18Mh 960 do 10Mh
Dcr gives me ~3-3.2 dcr or ~ 4.0-4.7$ (diff down) 970 do 1850Mh 960 do 1120Mh
Dcr gives me ~3-3.2 dcr or ~ 4.0-4.7$ (diff down) 970 do 1850Mh 960 do 1120Mh
You're using a messed up calculator, you should only be getting about 60% of what you're quoting.
I understand that by default your miner faster. But if you set the settings manually the same for both miners your miner is slightly faster, and then slower than free
It should be faster - we already know that SP tweaked the default intensity in his miner.
That doesn't mean that the comparison is fair - to make a fair comparison of the miners and the kernels, the condition should be the same.
Lets say that SP's miner run by default on -i 25, so should be the intensity for Alexis78's miner when comparing.
If I'm not wrong in the same conditions (same intesities and clocks) Alexis78's miner are faster on vcash and decred.
Not all miners tolerate the same intensities depending on how they code it. Some miners will draw more power, while hashing less, and crash more often while mining the same algo at the same speed.
its like saying that feul efficiency IS the factor in high octane drag races ... its not - its the time it takes to get from one point to another - and the fastest wins ... period ... they dont care how much feul or noise or rubber is used or destroyed in the process ...
that's because they have a wide margin.
everybody must take expenses into account.
if you made more money by lowering your TDP, wouldn't you do it?
do the math and you'll see.
agreed ...
expense IS a factor IF the result takes it into account ... if all you want is more hashrate at the expense of power - then great ...
i will concede though that in a larger farm environment - this view would be the deciding factor for the farm and its design and setup - as the smallest decrease in power would save a huge amount ...
but in this case pallas - i honestly dont think the power reduction is that great that it would be anything to worry about - especially if thehasrate is increased by a larger margin ... not a very small one ...
as for money - im not fussed on that end ... it comes good in the end when it comes to money ... im more concerned with the coins themselves ... more hash - more coin ...
hence the reason why i have always said - that my view of 'profitability' is VERY different form what most people accept it to be ...
#crysx
WE ARE NOT IN A HIGH OCTANE DRAG RACE--
There has to be a standard for measurement, even in a drag race. The amount of sassy banter that goes on in this thread is extra-ordinary, and it is all about who has the best code. Even drag races have rules, it is not always just the fastest time. Some races are about the closest time to a point, etc. There has to be a standard way of comparison.
I like my beer, I am not an idiot, and I want to keep my beer free of the yellow-tinted spray wash that is wizzed around so frequently in this happy thread. Don't pollute my sudz, please. --scryptr
sp ...
what version are your kernels sitting at currently - and where am i at with receiving any of the miners? ...
the email is back online again - and you can send emails again to that address ...
just so you know its me - chrysophylax
...
#crysx
what version are your kernels sitting at currently - and where am i at with receiving any of the miners? ...
the email is back online again - and you can send emails again to that address ...
just so you know its me - chrysophylax
...#crysx
its like saying that feul efficiency IS the factor in high octane drag races ... its not - its the time it takes to get from one point to another - and the fastest wins ... period ... they dont care how much feul or noise or rubber is used or destroyed in the process ...
that's because they have a wide margin.
everybody must take expenses into account.
if you made more money by lowering your TDP, wouldn't you do it?
do the math and you'll see.
agreed ...
expense IS a factor IF the result takes it into account ... if all you want is more hashrate at the expense of power - then great ...
i will concede though that in a larger farm environment - this view would be the deciding factor for the farm and its design and setup - as the smallest decrease in power would save a huge amount ...
but in this case pallas - i honestly dont think the power reduction is that great that it would be anything to worry about - especially if thehasrate is increased by a larger margin ... not a very small one ...
as for money - im not fussed on that end ... it comes good in the end when it comes to money ... im more concerned with the coins themselves ... more hash - more coin ...
hence the reason why i have always said - that my view of 'profitability' is VERY different form what most people accept it to be ...
#crysx
I try overclock my 960 and 970 - both GPU work in 1600Mhz on Alexis78 miner
Work fine, good hashrate and temp like sp version miner
Work fine, good hashrate and temp like sp version miner
Thats because in the the version he checked in yesterday he is using my constmem trick to reduce the register count. This trick was used in the sp-mod release from 10March and up. My modded kernals where always more overclock friendly.
Now you did a 6% boost with a proper launch configuration.
The limit is not yet reached.. Let's see what I can do over the weekend.
I try overclock my 960 and 970 - both GPU work in 1600Mhz on Alexis78 miner
Work fine, good hashrate and temp like sp version miner
p.s 970 -i 28.9 960 -i 26.9
Work fine, good hashrate and temp like sp version miner
p.s 970 -i 28.9 960 -i 26.9
that's because they have a wide margin.
everybody must take expenses into account.
if you made more money by lowering your TDP, wouldn't you do it?
do the math and you'll see.
everybody must take expenses into account.
if you made more money by lowering your TDP, wouldn't you do it?
do the math and you'll see.
But when decred came out, my private kernals where making $10 a day with the proper launchconfig on the 980ti. and the powercost was $0.5 (5%)
Pallas, did you try to overclock the core and lower the tdp at the same time?
fiddling with the clocks brings you to P0 and the end result was lower hashrate on same TDP.
windows may behave differently than linux, though.
finally it may depend on the driver version and card model.
in the case you are mentioning, the margin is so wide you probably better overclock, but this usually isn't the case.
I try overclock my 960 and 970 - both GPU work in 1600Mhz
at 1540Mhz degree - 75c
at 1600Mhz degree 78c
at 1540Mhz degree - 75c
at 1600Mhz degree 78c
that's because they have a wide margin.
everybody must take expenses into account.
if you made more money by lowering your TDP, wouldn't you do it?
do the math and you'll see.
everybody must take expenses into account.
if you made more money by lowering your TDP, wouldn't you do it?
do the math and you'll see.
But when decred came out, my private kernals where making $10 a day with the proper launchconfig on the 980ti. and the powercost was $0.5 (5%)
Pallas, did you try to overclock the core and lower the tdp at the same time?
its like saying that feul efficiency IS the factor in high octane drag races ... its not - its the time it takes to get from one point to another - and the fastest wins ... period ... they dont care how much feul or noise or rubber is used or destroyed in the process ...
that's because they have a wide margin.
everybody must take expenses into account.
if you made more money by lowering your TDP, wouldn't you do it?
do the math and you'll see.
then my assumption is still correct: if you run on low tdp, you can compare fairly.
a power reading at the wall can confirm.
a power reading at the wall can confirm.
Yes, For algos that doesn't use any memory, you can maintain the speed with a lower TDP.
I tried all the kinds of algo and all have better power efficiency on P2 and low TDP.
Much higher.
The income depends on your margin, but I doubt you'll make more money by overclocking.
Unless you run on free electricity, of course.
Here is decred sp-mod decred #8 With max overclocking. I use -i 31,9 on the 980ti and -i 29 on the 750ti.
Here is the sourcecode of the sp-mod #4:
https://github.com/sp-hash/ccminer/commit/3a726d90efd528ed386407bbd5b223583d80b378
Here is the sourcecode of the sp-mod #4:
https://github.com/sp-hash/ccminer/commit/3a726d90efd528ed386407bbd5b223583d80b378
@sp What clocks do you run on you're Asus STRIX 750ti?
Jump to: