Topic: Claymore's CryptoNote AMD GPU Miner v11.3 - page 236. (Read 2145041 times)
Miner began to show less speed. As if one card does not work, although writes that all the work. Help with a problem
Not true, Claymore said "Linux version is almost ready".
He is working on the XCN miner now.
Not true, Claymore said "Linux version is almost ready".
Linux miner?
The efficiency of the miner is very important. It is not profitable to mine BBR and XMR with GPU if the electricity price is over $.1/kWh.
Honestly with a linux miner out there the difficulty rate will sky-rocket for all these coins.
There are mega-farms that only mine using linux due to its simplicity, if there is a linux miner out there, profitability will go out the window like it did with x11/x13 coins.
There are mega-farms that only mine using linux due to its simplicity, if there is a linux miner out there, profitability will go out the window like it did with x11/x13 coins.
It's already not profitable for GPUs imo. Barely 1 USD per day with R9 290. I miss winter profits.
I agree. Once you take electricity into account, it's probably unprofitable for most people.
Honestly with a linux miner out there the difficulty rate will sky-rocket for all these coins.
There are mega-farms that only mine using linux due to its simplicity, if there is a linux miner out there, profitability will go out the window like it did with x11/x13 coins.
There are mega-farms that only mine using linux due to its simplicity, if there is a linux miner out there, profitability will go out the window like it did with x11/x13 coins.
It's already not profitable for GPUs imo. Barely 1 USD per day with R9 290. I miss winter profits.
not that hot. probably just mildly hotter than X11. it is likely that the miner is still not at optimum. i suspect some private miners are hashing much faster. perhaps even claymore is running a version that is much faster. no proof of course 
Hello dvdemecillo, great thinking you got there!Temperature is indeed a nice way to understand how close you are to optimal. If the temperature is far from "gaming temperature" then the algo not efficiently mapped.
As a consequence, the possibility of a much higher performance miner is indeed possible (albeit I cannot tell if "possible " is also "real").
Hi all, how hot does this algo run on AMD GPUs?
cooler than anything else I've tried.. scrypt was pushing 80c+ during the summer, x11/x13 around 76c and this is running at a nice 72c in my fully enclosed main pc with 2x270x's. My 2nd open rig with 2x7970's runs at 72c as well with a box fan aimed at it.
Both are overclocked well past anything I could do with scrypt or x1? 270x's are 1150/1500 and 7970's are 1110/1750. Those clocks would crash any other algo I've tried.
Get's me 2kh/s.. anywhere from 2.2-2.5 XMR a day, if I dumped I'd get close to .01btc which I can't see getting reliably from any other coin. That's what I was getting from scrypt in april and x11 in june.. not anymore!
Hi all, how hot does this algo run on AMD GPUs?
not that hot. probably just mildly hotter than X11. it is likely that the miner is still not at optimum. i suspect some private miners are hashing much faster. perhaps even claymore is running a version that is much faster. no proof of course
Hi all, how hot does this algo run on AMD GPUs?
Depends if your gpu heatsink is made from copper or tofu. 
Hi all, how hot does this algo run on AMD GPUs?
Honestly with a linux miner out there the difficulty rate will sky-rocket for all these coins.
There are mega-farms that only mine using linux due to its simplicity, if there is a linux miner out there, profitability will go out the window like it did with x11/x13 coins.
There are mega-farms that only mine using linux due to its simplicity, if there is a linux miner out there, profitability will go out the window like it did with x11/x13 coins.
Why 280x/7970 has so low hashrate when compared with 290x? It has 37,5% more TMU, but +100% hashrate (400-450h/s-7970 and 800-850h/s-290x).
Same with 260x to 270x, 150h/s compared to 300h/s
That is because 290 has more memory, 4GB instead of 3GB in 280. The more memory, the faster the hash. Memory speed also matters.
Quote
-nofee: set "1" to cancel my developer fee at all. In this mode some recent optimizations are disabled so mining speed will be slower by about 10%.
By enabling this mode, I will lose 100% of my earnings, you will lose only 5% of your earnings.
So you have a choice: "fastest miner" or "completely free miner but a bit slower".
If you want both "fastest" and "completely free" you should find some other miner that meets your requirements, just don't use this miner instead of claiming that I need
to cancel/reduce developer fee, saying that 5% developer fee is too much for this miner and so on.
By enabling this mode, I will lose 100% of my earnings, you will lose only 5% of your earnings.
So you have a choice: "fastest miner" or "completely free miner but a bit slower".
If you want both "fastest" and "completely free" you should find some other miner that meets your requirements, just don't use this miner instead of claiming that I need
to cancel/reduce developer fee, saying that 5% developer fee is too much for this miner and so on.
By enabling this mode, I will lose 100% of my earnings, you will lose only 5% of your earnings and 95% for electric cost and we lose 100% earning
Why 280x/7970 has so low hashrate when compared with 290x? It has 37,5% more TMU, but +100% hashrate (400-450h/s-7970 and 800-850h/s-290x).
Same with 260x to 270x, 150h/s compared to 300h/s
x64 systems are more stable about large memory sizes, but even on x64 systems sometimes OpenCL kernel fails to manage memory as miner requires. So I don't think that x86 version of miner will work stable at all. Of course I can reduce memory requirements but it will cause bad mining speed.
Linux version is almost ready, however, it takes me a lot of time to configure and test it, e.g. I spent almost half a day to install Catalyst 13.12 on Ubuntu 14.04 with no success. Any action in Linux takes much more time than in Windows, at least for me
Linux version is almost ready, however, it takes me a lot of time to configure and test it, e.g. I spent almost half a day to install Catalyst 13.12 on Ubuntu 14.04 with no success. Any action in Linux takes much more time than in Windows, at least for me
Please join us in #pimp-dev on freenode for help.
x64 systems are more stable about large memory sizes, but even on x64 systems sometimes OpenCL kernel fails to manage memory as miner requires. So I don't think that x86 version of miner will work stable at all. Of course I can reduce memory requirements but it will cause bad mining speed.
Linux version is almost ready, however, it takes me a lot of time to configure and test it, e.g. I spent almost half a day to install Catalyst 13.12 on Ubuntu 14.04 with no success. Any action in Linux takes much more time than in Windows, at least for me
Linux version is almost ready, however, it takes me a lot of time to configure and test it, e.g. I spent almost half a day to install Catalyst 13.12 on Ubuntu 14.04 with no success. Any action in Linux takes much more time than in Windows, at least for me
Why 280x/7970 has so low hashrate when compared with 290x? It has 37,5% more TMU, but +100% hashrate (400-450h/s-7970 and 800-850h/s-290x).
Jump to: