Trust me the sole reason is the memory configuration!
I know how to access the BIOS on any tab to see the memory configuration ?I'm just curious , change the memory to which side increased the hash
Topic: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell / Pascal kernels. - page 798. (Read 2347664 times)
I'm just curious , change the memory to which side increased the hash
Try to overvolt.
perfcap reason.. does your card have 6+6 pin power or 6+8pin?
6+8pinperfcap reason.. does your card have 6+6 pin power or 6+8pin?
Increase the voltage to 1.212 below the hash.(17-20)
, which doesn't really make sense... more so because he has a tdp cap at 60%
You're wrong, importance, hash really shows the pool, you can see the pool early screen 970 + 960 approximately 32MhsThis model is MSI 970 100 ME right?
She modified the BIOS . Our people have helped to edit the BIOS on low consumption and high performance .1430 watch \ 1.137vps Now I understand why others can't 22-23Mhs . Elpida is not the reason ..
I'm still curious of the hashrate difference of people overclocking their memory because everytime I do, the hashrate is the same and all I get is slighty more power consumption. For me, for every algo 100% of the improvements are coming from core OC and memory OC doesn't make a difference at all.
Anyway, Eth is pretty low at the difficulty chart as far as I'm concerned so I'm mainly asking this for other memory hard algos (lyra2, lyra2v2, scrypt-jane).
Anyway, Eth is pretty low at the difficulty chart as far as I'm concerned so I'm mainly asking this for other memory hard algos (lyra2, lyra2v2, scrypt-jane).
GTX 970 at lyra2v2
same clocks core and memory
samsung is faster by ~200 khash compared to hynix memory
I'm still curious of the hashrate difference of people overclocking their memory because everytime I do, the hashrate is the same and all I get is slighty more power consumption. For me, for every algo 100% of the improvements are coming from core OC and memory OC doesn't make a difference at all.
Anyway, Eth is pretty low at the difficulty chart as far as I'm concerned so I'm mainly asking this for other memory hard algos (lyra2, lyra2v2, scrypt-jane).
Anyway, Eth is pretty low at the difficulty chart as far as I'm concerned so I'm mainly asking this for other memory hard algos (lyra2, lyra2v2, scrypt-jane).
Newbie here. Running a 980ti and only seeing 8 MH/s on W10 (it benchmarks at 2x+)
ethminer-cuda-0.9.41-new2 -U F xxx --cuda-grid-size 8192 --cuda-block-size 128 --cuda-schedule sync
It's unclear if I'm hitting the memory wall or have a problem given I see recent posts with higher numbers in the 22-23 970 range. I'll dig in, but in guidance is welcome.
ethminer-cuda-0.9.41-new2 -U F xxx --cuda-grid-size 8192 --cuda-block-size 128 --cuda-schedule sync
It's unclear if I'm hitting the memory wall or have a problem given I see recent posts with higher numbers in the 22-23 970 range. I'll dig in, but in guidance is welcome.
ETH is memory constrained thats why you cant really optimize it. (which was a VERY smart move)
All that goes on is that his card is in P 2 state.
If the timing table of memory is done for all straps up from very high oced memory down to the lowest possible state (eg. 150 Mhz) the timings of the memory actually IMPROVE if you downclock ...
That's why I suggested to eg. HEX Edit the bios timings from a LOW frequency state to the next higher one.
It is just funny because elpida is normally known to have the worst timings and the least oc headroom.
That tells me now that there is probably a BIG headroom for hynix and samsung untapped by us.
With bios timing hacks we could improve nvidia hash for eth by probably a lot.
This model is MSI 970 100 ME right?
All that goes on is that his card is in P 2 state.
If the timing table of memory is done for all straps up from very high oced memory down to the lowest possible state (eg. 150 Mhz) the timings of the memory actually IMPROVE if you downclock ...
That's why I suggested to eg. HEX Edit the bios timings from a LOW frequency state to the next higher one.
It is just funny because elpida is normally known to have the worst timings and the least oc headroom.
That tells me now that there is probably a BIG headroom for hynix and samsung untapped by us.
With bios timing hacks we could improve nvidia hash for eth by probably a lot.
This model is MSI 970 100 ME right?
the g1 gaming cards 970 have tdp of 250W because they come with a 8pin + 6pin connector.. When mining the power consumption is sometimes down to 60% of tdp. Depends on algo..
Same, I have Elpedia, Hynx, and Samsung and there is no difference between them except for the OS (W10 and W8).
Then I do not understand what affects me at 23. Maybe screenshot hash map will explain.
z.gif
You have somehow limited your power to 60%, hashrate drops 25% and power usage 40%.
He's posting a screenshot of him hashing at 23Mhs for Ethereum with a 970, which doesn't really make sense... more so because he has a tdp cap at 60%
Try to overvolt.
perfcap reason.. does your card have 6+6 pin power or 6+8pin?
perfcap reason.. does your card have 6+6 pin power or 6+8pin?
Chunky ethminer done:
https://github.com/Genoil/cpp-ethereum/tree/opencl-chunks
CUDA users need not bother. AMD users are invited to play around with various values after --cl-chunks command line option. Chunk size in MB. Based on reports for dagSimCL, chunk size of 640 may yield good results. Note that I've written this without access to AMD hardware, so your mileage may vary...
https://github.com/Genoil/cpp-ethereum/tree/opencl-chunks
CUDA users need not bother. AMD users are invited to play around with various values after --cl-chunks command line option. Chunk size in MB. Based on reports for dagSimCL, chunk size of 640 may yield good results. Note that I've written this without access to AMD hardware, so your mileage may vary...
Thanx! Anyone have compiled it already? (Windows) Just to lazy to do this thing
But want to try. Or again will be waiting for cryptomining-blog to do all the dirty work? ))
Increase since the public miner: (gtx 750ti)
lyra2v2: +206khash (+4.3%)
quark: +61khash (+0.92%)
qubit: +189khash (+3.75%)
x11: +84khash (+2.65%)
x13: +56khash (+2.22%)
x15: +47khash (+2.16%)
keccak: (+20%)
Next version will have a boost in the quark algo. +200-300khash 970 and +50 on the 750ti.
Subscribe for a 0.1BTC to support the development of opensource software. Linux users can use Wine.
lyra2v2: +206khash (+4.3%)
quark: +61khash (+0.92%)
qubit: +189khash (+3.75%)
x11: +84khash (+2.65%)
x13: +56khash (+2.22%)
x15: +47khash (+2.16%)
keccak: (+20%)
Next version will have a boost in the quark algo. +200-300khash 970 and +50 on the 750ti.
Subscribe for a 0.1BTC to support the development of opensource software. Linux users can use Wine.
Results of S2 version of miner vs Release 70 and S1 Private miner.
Increase vs S1 is (kH/s) per card.
Lyra2REv2 12.33
NeoScript -1.17
Quark 0
Qubit 121.5
x11 26.67
x13 16
x15 25.83
Increase vs S1 is (kH/s) per card.
Lyra2REv2 12.33
NeoScript -1.17
Quark 0
Qubit 121.5
x11 26.67
x13 16
x15 25.83
Same, I have Elpedia, Hynx, and Samsung and there is no difference between them except for the OS (W10 and W8).
Then I do not understand what affects me at 23. Maybe screenshot hash map will explain.z.gif
again with these too long message to edit... 
just to react a bit: there is no high demand algo, it is just a question of timing and you can't switch project in the middle of the project because of some p&d scheme going on at an instant t on some unknown coin.
Second, some of you (especially you in fact) need to realize that hashrate can't be increased indefinitely. We know where it is possible (roughly) to get some improvement but for some algos it would be too much work (hence not profitable for us) to develop. For ethereum, development is stuck by the size of the dag file and nothing can really be done about it, because it is way too large for most of the cards... the alternative would be to recalculate part of the dag element (actually I tried it...) but it is then too slow, because there are very large loop...)
So no matter how much you want a better eth miner, there are constraints which limit any kind of development at that level.
just to react a bit: there is no high demand algo, it is just a question of timing and you can't switch project in the middle of the project because of some p&d scheme going on at an instant t on some unknown coin.
Second, some of you (especially you in fact
) need to realize that hashrate can't be increased indefinitely. We know where it is possible (roughly) to get some improvement but for some algos it would be too much work (hence not profitable for us) to develop. For ethereum, development is stuck by the size of the dag file and nothing can really be done about it, because it is way too large for most of the cards... the alternative would be to recalculate part of the dag element (actually I tried it...) but it is then too slow, because there are very large loop...) So no matter how much you want a better eth miner, there are constraints which limit any kind of development at that level.
When the market for Feather gets pushed up for 3-4 months, it's probably a good sign that miners will be mining it with Neoscrypt. As I mentioned before, just looking at whattomine would give you a pretty good idea of what's in demand. Some coins are not on What though like Ethereum (despite requesting it a few times) and Spread.
Now that Cryptsy crashed and Feathercoin is pretty much obliterated, there is no demand for Neoscrypt, which means almost no one will be looking to buy a miner for it. You can always market this as 'donations', but that's not what people want or need.
Making a product is a two way relationship. Both the maker and the user have to benefit. Just making something because you feel like it, then complaining when people don't donate doesn't help anyone. You need to eat, I need to eat, I mine whatever is most profitable, you help me make more profits, I help you eat too. It's not too complicated. Right now that's Ethereum and Spread. If x11 could be improved that definitely would be a bread winner too.
I'm all for a miner fee to support you guys long run too and just use whoevers miner is faster (or hopefully a combination miner that everyone can get paid from). In particular, this should hold a lot of interest for you as a developer. It means however much you improve a miner is how much you get paid and just having the fastest miner means you will make money off of it, regardless of how much faster it is then the competition (within reason). If it's just 2% faster then the competition, then a miner fee would be paid for. Claymore marketed his miner this way and it worked quite well.
I've read the thread (and keep up with SP's thread on a regular basis) about Ethereum and I realize there are development hurdles, that doesn't change that it's in demand and if someone figures out how to get around it with some sort of clever trick they'll reap rewards for it. Considering AMD hardware seems to max out at 30Mhs and Nvidia stuff about 30% less, there may be room for improvement to get around the whole memory controller exploding. Even if you can't do it, someone else may come along who might be able to by doing something you never thought of, so it needs to be talked about...
Currently we were talking about Ethminer not working as well in W8 compared to W10, which is a bug and it may or may not be able to be figured out, but we wont be able to tell until things are looked at more thoroughly.
I agree on the part where devs modify whatever they feel like. In a way, it's their right to do so. If they want to make more money. yeah, they should mod whatever is most profitable. And there are out there that do so. But mostly not in public ;-)
And as stated above, in some cases, it just isn't worth the time/effort.
And as stated above, in some cases, it just isn't worth the time/effort.
Yup... I understand they can do what they want, but when it comes down to it and people need to profit, we need to talk about what really needs to be done. Right now SP's working on pretty much everything and I would like to buy his private miner, but nothing he's making is more profitable... It's a bad business decision for me. Maybe in the future when something he's making becomes more profitable then say Eth or Spread, I'll buy his miner.
I would love to either buy a miner or use a miner with a miner fee that earns me more money. Everyone profits! It's the best sort of business relationship. I'm sure there are plenty of big farms with their own employed kernel devs working on x11 even if they rather work on Lyra right now or something.
can I have the TL:DR?
Make kernels for algos people use.
If you're afraid of putting in a little bit of work and no one buying it, make a miner with a fee.
elpida memory and I find no difference in eth hashing speed between them. Windows 7 x64.
elpida memory 970? File .bat as I have above ? Flags must be exactly like me . Other flags of a file given only 17..
I'm not a programmer.I am trying to find a reason why others can not do 23Mhs. I then worked at 22-23Mhs ..
ps cuda7.5
Same, I have Elpedia, Hynx, and Samsung and there is no difference between them except for the OS (W10 and W8).
elpida memory and I find no difference in eth hashing speed between them. Windows 7 x64.
elpida memory 970? File .bat as I have above ? Flags must be exactly like me . Other flags of a file given only 17..
I'm not a programmer.I am trying to find a reason why others can not do 23Mhs. I then worked at 22-23Mhs ..
ps cuda7.5
haha really? Elpida takes the crown?
On the screen you can see that one rate of 22-23Mhs 970..url=https://fotki.yandex.ru/next/users/vita1ico/album/377049/view/1331941]
[/url]DSC03601.JPG
Two friends from our forum does not rise above 17Mhs per samsung & hunix.
17 mhash is elpida
and the 22mhash is? (samsung I guess?)
btw what is the core clock AND memory clock set to?
I have 970 100ME(elpida)-22Mhs.and the 22mhash is? (samsung I guess?)
btw what is the core clock AND memory clock set to?
Who is hynix or samsung - 17Mhs maximum.
try-
ethminer -U -F http://pool.eth.pp.ua/?miner=33@addresswallet@Vita1ico --cuda-devices 0 --high-cpu-load --cuda-grid-size 8192 --cuda-block-size 128 --cuda-schedule sync
"ethminer-cuda-0.9.41-new2"
haha really? Elpida takes the crown?
So maybe bad vram timings is something the board partners should be blamed for. Afterall they have each their own bios, at least for the custom versions.
Chunky ethminer done:
https://github.com/Genoil/cpp-ethereum/tree/opencl-chunks
CUDA users need not bother. AMD users are invited to play around with various values after --cl-chunks command line option. Chunk size in MB. Based on reports for dagSimCL, chunk size of 640 may yield good results. Note that I've written this without access to AMD hardware, so your mileage may vary...
https://github.com/Genoil/cpp-ethereum/tree/opencl-chunks
CUDA users need not bother. AMD users are invited to play around with various values after --cl-chunks command line option. Chunk size in MB. Based on reports for dagSimCL, chunk size of 640 may yield good results. Note that I've written this without access to AMD hardware, so your mileage may vary...
17 mhash is elpida
and the 22mhash is? (samsung I guess?)
btw what is the core clock AND memory clock set to?
I have 970 100ME(elpida)-22Mhs.and the 22mhash is? (samsung I guess?)
btw what is the core clock AND memory clock set to?
Who is hynix or samsung - 17Mhs maximum.
try-
ethminer -U -F http://pool.eth.pp.ua/?miner=33@addresswallet@Vita1ico --cuda-devices 0 --high-cpu-load --cuda-grid-size 8192 --cuda-block-size 128 --cuda-schedule sync
"ethminer-cuda-0.9.41-new2"
Anyone know what BTC can you get with 100 mh/s on ETH?
you could use something like this:
http://etherscan.io/ether-mining-calculator
Jump to: