CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell / Pascal kernels. - page 913.

scryptr

legendary

Activity: 1797

Merit: 1028

POWERED USB RISERS--

Powered USB risers cost about the same as the cheap and dangerous flat-cable risers picured a few posts back. They power each card with a 4-pin MOLLEX or SATA adapter, not to the PCIe port, but to the goldfingers of the card, just like the motherboard slots.

They are more safe, and the USB cable is more flexible. --scryptr

P.S. SP_ release dot 70 mines Neoscrypt at 340kh/s on my GTX 960, rather than 330-335kh/s with release dot 69. However, a very brief attempt at solo-mining failed. I'll try again later. --scryptr

Cryptozillah

hero member

Activity: 687

Merit: 502

Powered risers are pretty cheap, why not just buy them when you buy a riser and sleep good at night.
I really dont like pushing alot of power trough the mobo 24/7 when there is a cheap way to go around that.

If people can buy a shitload of expensive gpu:s they can probably afford a couple of bucks on a descent riser imo.

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2954

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

Quote from: myagui on October 03, 2015, 08:19:15 AM

Quote from: Strannik-74 on October 03, 2015, 07:44:39 AM

[...] 750Ti without power, steel risers burn through 12+ volts[...]

Of course they do... Those risers are not made for high power cards.
The very worst card for such risers, is the 750/750TI without external power, as the card is entirely powered from PCIe, but even with externally powered cards, those risers are known to fry quite frequently.
Were you lucky enough to not get any damage beyond the risers themselves?

The asus rock BTC h61 or h81 has 2 extra power slots.

4 pin=150W (this is standard on all motherboards)
4 pin * 2= 300 (use two seperate cables)

total of 450W

No need for powered risers with 6 750ti.

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2954

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

-Fixed neoscrypt solo mining(Tnelson)
-Stop mining on disconnect's to save power.(pallas / flipclip)
-Faster lyra2v2 on compute 5.2 cards.
-Faster neoscrypt on compute 5.0 cards.
-Fixed neoscrypt on gtx 950 and gtx 980ti cards.

1.5.70(sp-MOD) is available here: (3-oct-2015)

https://github.com/sp-hash/ccminer/releases/

The sourcecode is available here:

https://github.com/sp-hash/ccminer

please test and report hashrates.

myagui

legendary

Activity: 1154

Merit: 1001

Quote from: Strannik-74 on October 03, 2015, 07:44:39 AM

[...] 750Ti without power, steel risers burn through 12+ volts[...]

Of course they do... Those risers are not made for high power cards.
The very worst card for such risers, is the 750/750TI without external power, as the card is entirely powered from PCIe, but even with externally powered cards, those risers are known to fry quite frequently.

Were you lucky enough to not get any damage beyond the risers themselves?

Strannik-74

full member

Activity: 348

Merit: 102

GIGABYTE GeForce GTX 970 [GV-N970WF3OC-4GD 1.0]
GPU 1264MHz (+150)/ mem 1753MHz (lock) / VDDC 1.2V (lock)
Rig idle 70W

-- ccminer-1.5.69-git-spmod --
Lyra2REv2 - 9.5MH/s - 155W (Rig 225W)
X11- 8.7MH/s - 175W (Rig 245W)
Quark- 18MH/S - 220W (Rig 290W)

750Ti without power, steel risers burn through 12+ volts

djm34

legendary

Activity: 1400

Merit: 1050

Quote from: bensam1231 on October 02, 2015, 05:51:59 PM

Quote from: chup on October 02, 2015, 01:26:31 AM

Quote from: bensam1231 on October 01, 2015, 05:40:58 PM

Oh yeah? The whole thing stopping this is a license agreement the majority of developers don't even respect as they take the code from open source miners and use it in their private ones anyway? ...

bensam, if "private miner" is not published, than it is not violating open source license. As soon it is published in any way, than source code should be published as well. Nobody is breaking rules here sending closed binaries over private channels. BTW, I'm also for optimized miner with fee, but devs already declared it's too much hassle doing it from scratch.

I think you don't understand the license if you think you can profit off someones work as long as it's not 'public'. It still counts, its just not enforceable in anyway unless someone who receives the miner initiates it. When they talk about 'private work' that means you don't share it with anyone, not you don't share it with anyone publicly. Open licensing mainly refers to profiting off other peoples work though. That still happens even if it's not public, developers with private miners who sell them are already violating the open license, but this obviously isn't their area of forte, the only reason it's come up recently is because people are looking to use it as a excuse.

As I mentioned already,

mentionned... ? you repeat it in every single message you post.. Grin

Quote

All of that could easily be programmed in, it's just someones address, or it could divy it up on the receiving end of the payments, which would probably be easiest.

easily programmed, this is where you are wrong (and I am not speaking about the logic)... it isn't easy at all in the sense you cannot just put an address and get the coins, you need to gives address/username/password for every single pool and every single coin.

For solo, it can't even work (at least not with getwork), I think it is possible to do something with gbt though...

chup

sr. member

Activity: 737

Merit: 262

Me, Myself & I

Quote from: bensam1231 on October 02, 2015, 05:51:59 PM

I think you don't understand the license if you think you can profit off someones work as long as it's not 'public'. It still counts, its just not enforceable in anyway unless someone who receives the miner initiates it. When they talk about 'private work' that means you don't share it with anyone, not you don't share it with anyone publicly. Open licensing mainly refers to profiting off other peoples work though. That still happens even if it's not public, developers with private miners who sell them are already violating the open license, but this obviously isn't their area of forte, the only reason it's come up recently is because people are looking to use it as a excuse.

As I mentioned already, it's pretty easy to include more people with a fee schedule and this is a non-issue as this sort of stuff happens all the time in the mining community. No one is going to sue anyone else, nothing is going to happen, especially if you include all the main parties that created the work... That's mainly where I think people starting to poopoo on this. If DJM doesn't get any bit of the L2V2 fees, even though he developed most of the work for the initial miner. All of that could easily be programmed in, it's just someones address, or it could divy it up on the receiving end of the payments, which would probably be easiest.

Before continuing Your accusations, please provide GPL license text that is violated when sending binaries over private channels. You can assume that user is asking and paying developer to make better code for him from open source code. Can You make citation from GPL license that is broken with this?

zTheWolfz

full member

Activity: 231

Merit: 150

Quote from: kahir on October 02, 2015, 12:08:42 PM

can I get info on cards like 970 980 980ti Hashrate on quark using the new releases

I'm getting 10.4 M/hash on GTX 960

I get 10.650kh/s with r66, 10.550 r69 with my 960 on quark. oc 100mhz

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2954

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

Quote from: flipclip on October 02, 2015, 08:07:02 PM

Quote from: sp_ on October 02, 2015, 06:31:35 PM

Quote from: bensam1231 on October 02, 2015, 05:51:59 PM

Pretty sure there aren't any. People just seeing possible income and not taking into account if they start mining on a low difficulty coin with a lot of power, it'll just crash things.

like the sya coin?

sia?

Yah.Mining the shitcoins can be very profitable...

flipclip

member

Activity: 111

Merit: 10

Quote from: sp_ on October 02, 2015, 06:31:35 PM

Quote from: bensam1231 on October 02, 2015, 05:51:59 PM

Pretty sure there aren't any. People just seeing possible income and not taking into account if they start mining on a low difficulty coin with a lot of power, it'll just crash things.

like the sya coin?

sia?

sp_

legendary

Activity: 2954

Merit: 1087

Team Black developer

Quote from: bensam1231 on October 02, 2015, 05:51:59 PM

Pretty sure there aren't any. People just seeing possible income and not taking into account if they start mining on a low difficulty coin with a lot of power, it'll just crash things.

like the sya coin?

bensam1231

legendary

Activity: 1764

Merit: 1024

Quote from: chup on October 02, 2015, 01:26:31 AM

Quote from: bensam1231 on October 01, 2015, 05:40:58 PM

Oh yeah? The whole thing stopping this is a license agreement the majority of developers don't even respect as they take the code from open source miners and use it in their private ones anyway? ...

bensam, if "private miner" is not published, than it is not violating open source license. As soon it is published in any way, than source code should be published as well. Nobody is breaking rules here sending closed binaries over private channels. BTW, I'm also for optimized miner with fee, but devs already declared it's too much hassle doing it from scratch.

I think you don't understand the license if you think you can profit off someones work as long as it's not 'public'. It still counts, its just not enforceable in anyway unless someone who receives the miner initiates it. When they talk about 'private work' that means you don't share it with anyone, not you don't share it with anyone publicly. Open licensing mainly refers to profiting off other peoples work though. That still happens even if it's not public, developers with private miners who sell them are already violating the open license, but this obviously isn't their area of forte, the only reason it's come up recently is because people are looking to use it as a excuse.

As I mentioned already, it's pretty easy to include more people with a fee schedule and this is a non-issue as this sort of stuff happens all the time in the mining community. No one is going to sue anyone else, nothing is going to happen, especially if you include all the main parties that created the work... That's mainly where I think people starting to poopoo on this. If DJM doesn't get any bit of the L2V2 fees, even though he developed most of the work for the initial miner. All of that could easily be programmed in, it's just someones address, or it could divy it up on the receiving end of the payments, which would probably be easiest.

Quote from: pallas on October 02, 2015, 02:31:49 PM

Just out of curiosity, what coin worth mining is using pentablake?

Pretty sure there aren't any. People just seeing possible income and not taking into account if they start mining on a low difficulty coin with a lot of power, it'll just crash things.

t-nelson

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: badgoes on October 02, 2015, 02:55:13 PM

Quote from: t-nelson on October 02, 2015, 02:49:15 PM

Quote from: badgoes on October 02, 2015, 01:49:00 PM

hi

one question about compiling in win 7 with cuda 6.5

this messages are in the compiling log from vs 2013 community

1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(50): warning : variable "Htarg" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(51): warning : variable "coef" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(68): warning : variable "endianmid" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(73): warning : variable "nloop" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(50): warning : variable "Htarg" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(51): warning : variable "coef" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(68): warning : variable "endianmid" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(73): warning : variable "nloop" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(50): warning : variable "Htarg" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(51): warning : variable "coef" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(68): warning : variable "endianmid" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(73): warning : variable "nloop" was declared but never referenced
ptxas info : 0 bytes gmem
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(50): warning : variable "Htarg" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(51): warning : variable "coef" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(68): warning : variable "endianmid" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(73): warning : variable "nloop" was declared but never referenced

ist that normal

thanks for answer

C&P FTW, I suspect.

Unused variable warnings are innocuous either way.

i asked because i getting out of the new release only 9100 on lyra2v2 with djm version i was over 10k

Could be launch params changes in a recent commit.

badgoes

newbie

Activity: 29

Merit: 0

Quote from: t-nelson on October 02, 2015, 02:49:15 PM

Quote from: badgoes on October 02, 2015, 01:49:00 PM

hi

one question about compiling in win 7 with cuda 6.5

this messages are in the compiling log from vs 2013 community

1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(50): warning : variable "Htarg" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(51): warning : variable "coef" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(68): warning : variable "endianmid" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(73): warning : variable "nloop" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(50): warning : variable "Htarg" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(51): warning : variable "coef" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(68): warning : variable "endianmid" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(73): warning : variable "nloop" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(50): warning : variable "Htarg" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(51): warning : variable "coef" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(68): warning : variable "endianmid" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(73): warning : variable "nloop" was declared but never referenced
ptxas info : 0 bytes gmem
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(50): warning : variable "Htarg" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(51): warning : variable "coef" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(68): warning : variable "endianmid" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(73): warning : variable "nloop" was declared but never referenced

ist that normal

thanks for answer

C&P FTW, I suspect.

Unused variable warnings are innocuous either way.

i asked because i getting out of the new release only 9100 on lyra2v2 with djm version i was over 10k

t-nelson

member

Activity: 70

Merit: 10

Quote from: badgoes on October 02, 2015, 01:49:00 PM

hi

one question about compiling in win 7 with cuda 6.5

this messages are in the compiling log from vs 2013 community

1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(50): warning : variable "Htarg" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(51): warning : variable "coef" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(68): warning : variable "endianmid" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(73): warning : variable "nloop" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(50): warning : variable "Htarg" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(51): warning : variable "coef" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(68): warning : variable "endianmid" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(73): warning : variable "nloop" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(50): warning : variable "Htarg" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(51): warning : variable "coef" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(68): warning : variable "endianmid" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(73): warning : variable "nloop" was declared but never referenced
ptxas info : 0 bytes gmem
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(50): warning : variable "Htarg" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(51): warning : variable "coef" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(68): warning : variable "endianmid" was declared but never referenced
1>C:/compile/ccminer-windows/bitcredit/bitcredit.cu(73): warning : variable "nloop" was declared but never referenced

ist that normal

thanks for answer

C&P FTW, I suspect.

Unused variable warnings are innocuous either way.

Slava_K

hero member

Activity: 677

Merit: 500

JoinCoin... 8 algos. yesterday i mine 130MH 3 hours - 1 block. Mine in solo...

go6ooo1212

legendary

Activity: 1512

Merit: 1000

quarkchain.io

Quote from: pallas on October 02, 2015, 02:31:49 PM

Just out of curiosity, what coin worth mining is using pentablake?

Yeah , I've missed that also...

Vita1ico

full member

Activity: 155

Merit: 100

Quote from: pallas on October 02, 2015, 02:31:49 PM

Just out of curiosity, what coin worth mining is using pentablake?

+
Also interesting ...))

pallas

legendary

Activity: 2716

Merit: 1094

Black Belt Developer

Just out of curiosity, what coin worth mining is using pentablake?

Topic: CCminer(SP-MOD) Modded NVIDIA Maxwell / Pascal kernels. - page 913. (Read 2347659 times)