Topic: Claymore's Dual Ethereum AMD+NVIDIA GPU Miner v15.0 (Windows/Linux) - page 1281. (Read 6590565 times)

I asked this about 10 pages ago, guess we're going to have to wait and see.

Not sure if this question has been asked yet or not:

Will we have to wait for someone to write a special software for the AMD RX 480 4GB coming out June 29 @ $199 USD in order to mine with it?

Dude, no way... From my reading, people can't even get their 270's to run stable over 1200, let alone 1300! So I definitely think that's just a lucky chip. The only issue with my top card (GPU 0) is that it gets really hot. 80C right now at 85% fan speed, 1050/1500. I'm not really sure what the max safe temp is, but I'd rather not go way above 80C, and 100% fan is going to kill it after a while I'm sure... I may try 1100/1500 or so later just to see what happens, as the difference between 1000/1500 is pretty big, so I'm sure 1100 will be good. I'm kind of thinking about a fan on the side of my case now. I can't think of any other way to cool the top card down and run it hard like this...

But thanks for clearing that up about hashrate with your 270x. I was actually using this link to assume I would be getting better performance. https://badmofo.github.io/ethereum-mining-calculator/

Stupid of me, but I guess I was being optimistic with the numbers. I can't figure out why this guy's reported numbers are so high, across the board. Doesn't seem like he'd have anything to gain by claiming better performance, so I assumed this to be the whole truth.

I got 5 of those 7950, 3 of them fried and I sold the remaing ones to people not going to cryptomine.
Sapphire made the error of using the exact same desing for R9 280 cards, so the problem stayed.

Anyway, not all models were suffering of this design flaw. Sapphire produces good cards.

Like I said, I think I'm just vaguely remembering that thread from a few weeks back... But I could have sword they were 200 or 300 series cards.

I would want to hope that they'd work as well as any others... I mean, if they fail at mining, they were probably poorly built in general. So the above comment may have explained that. I would just be scared to use recent Sapphires because of the negative reviews. Could even have just been a few bad batches because they were all ordered at once by the buyer... Just too hard to tell with anecdotal evidence, but I'd still caution everyone nonetheless.

I've got 270x that hashes 15,85 right now. But thats one strange card, at default it gives 1Mh more than other identical ones and oc-s like hell, 1300/1750 day and night. No mods, no special cooling, out of the box. Wish i had more of em

Other "regular" cards go 14,2 oc and 12,4 stock. So, it depends.

It's funny 2 years ago, everyone wanted Sapphire cards.  I have 2+ year old Sapphire cards and brand new Sapphire cards, only RMA'd one. 

Maybe 13 Mh/s is about right for a 270 according to this http://www.mininghwcomparison.com/list/index.php?brand=amd        There's a 270x mining at 11 mh/s that was added recently but looks like he's not on the best drivers.  There is also a 270 at 16mh/s but at a 1200 clock and he may have added that when the dag was smaller.  There are others on there more or less in line with your speeds, but nowhere near 18mh/s.  My reference 290s do a little less that 27 so one is probably about the same as 2 270s

The bad cards were mainly 7950 with weak power stage design, which overheated and/or burned

I cannot disagree more with the above comment on Sapphire.

I have used 8 280x's (Dual-X, 3GB OC, 11221-00-20G) since late 2013 and they still go strong with the exception of changing out some fans.

Of course, YMMV.

WHATEVER you do, don't use Sapphire for mining... It seems like everyone and their brother, sister, and mother, are having issues mining with Sapphire cards...

I thought with my R9 270's (2 of them) ~36MH would be my max. I haven't seen it yet.

I'm getting about 25MH/s Ethereum, about 380MH/s on Decred. I can get about 26MH/s in Eth only, but it's worth it to mine decred alongside ethereum. Keep in mind, that's considerably overclocked. Stock on mine is 900-925 Core Clock, 1400 Mem clock. I have it at 1050Mhz Core, 1500mhz Memory.


My two cards together probably use about 350 watts. I would think a 295x2 would use at LEAST 500 watts. Make sure you have a hefty power supply.

As for your expected mining speed... It's hard to really say. Two r9 270's are definitely more powerful than a single 290. So if I'm getting ~26MH/s, I'd imagine you'd get closer to 40. Maybe 45MH/s with a heavy overclock. But again, the problem is that I keep hearing nothing but complaints about Sapphire for mining...

Could you perhaps go with two R9 290's, non-Sapphire?

I don't want to hate on Sapphire. I used to have a passively-cooled HD5450 that I ran pretty hard. I now use it in my HTPC build. I love the thing, even now. But when you hear nothing but problems about a certain manufacturer in this particular usage... I can't help but recommend against it. I remember a thread on the ethereum forum where a guy had like 6 Sapphire cards for mining. Multiple failed within the first couple weeks. Not a good sign...

you can lease your rig at mining rig rental then use the BTC earned to buy GPU hashing power. Or you can sell your s7 and start mining with gpus (at least thats what i did)

@pikachuy could you teach me how you undervolt and clock your 380x? I'm looking for ways to get stable rates with lesser watts used.. thanks in advance =D

went mode 1 and never looked back!! whoop

Hey guys,

I'm about to buy a 295x2 but still have some questions.

It's a Sapphire one.


What speed should it get with claymores miner on ETH only Windows 7? Do you think 60 MH/s is realistic?

What core clock, mem clock, voltage should I run it?

Anyone got a rough estimation of the power consumption for ETH only? My rough estimations tells me ~ 350 Watts under full load.

Is the stock hybrid cooler strong enough to hold the card below 75 degrees celsius?

How is that related to what pikachuy is reporting? He says that the hashrate goes up AFTER you downclock again to 1125.
Btw I can confirm this as well, pretty weird... got gigabyte 380 on samsung chips

@pikachuy dont trust gpu-z readings for core wattage, they are wrong.
For me the operation didnt change gpu-z wattage readings (they are still at 60W) and readings from meters suggest around 140W per card.

Yea, it's quite odd that it does it, but it doesn't bother me, can't complain about increase mh/s. I'm just glad to share what I found and the steps needed to replicate it =)

Edit: Can someone else besides a 380 card try the steps i mention to see if it show the same results?


Here you go restless



As you can see, with the undervolt and underclocking and reducing power limit, the power consumption is greatly reduced while still having a stable 20 mh/s.

On my screenshot, first 2 cards are powercooler 380x, and the rest are gigabyte 380.

If I run it at stock the VDDC power is around 80w, so since power consumption is important to me, lowering about 30w on the VDDC per card is good for me.

I just tried this on a rig with two Saph 380's and one ASUS 380. It picked up one mh/s per card on ETH and ~10mh/s per card on Decred. Dunno if it is a display anomaly or what.............but I'll leave it anyway.

Dang... thank you for this.  I'm not new to mining but I am new to GPU mining and overclocking and I couldn't understand why my 380's hashrate wouldn't budge increasing the core clock but I found a nice little boost by upping the memclock to 1500.  After reading the thread you linked to, it makes sense now.  I think this card is doing best for me at 980/1500 on W764 with 15.12 drivers and CDM.

It's not CDM related, read here https://forum.ethereum.org/discussion/comment/39962/#Comment_39962      It's a problem with 380's

Please run also one of hwinfo or gpu-z for confirmation.
Trixx and AfterBurner sometimes incorrectly show current clock (both are simply same program, written by Unwinder, with different skins, customized for Saphire and MSI)
20MH/s seems way too good for 380 at 850/1125

PS: Then there could be possibility that somehow going down from 1500, memory is running with better/faster timings
Maybe running memory benchmark (Sandra?) will show bigger memcopy speed ?!