EWBF's CUDA Zcash miner - page 218. | Bitcointalksearch.org

sublimus

full member

Activity: 240

Merit: 100

Quote from: EWBF_ on January 23, 2017, 07:08:36 AM

CUDA: Device: 0 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 1 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 2 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 3 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 4 Thread exited with code: 46
ERROR: Some workers are stopped. Attempt to restart: 2
CUDA: Device: 0 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 0 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 1 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 1 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 2 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 2 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 3 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 3 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 4 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 4 Thread exited with code: 46

[/quote]

Just got the same glitch, restarting the script worked fine.
Some time ago I had kind of the same problem with Claymore and my AMD's.
hint to EWBF: Setting the (-r 240) "restart by user" switch to every 4 hours solved my problem. Wink

EWBF_

full member

Activity: 198

Merit: 160

Quote from: dtawom on January 23, 2017, 05:00:51 AM

Quote from: bason on December 26, 2016, 10:04:27 PM

Quote

CUDA: Device: 3 Thread exited with code: 77
CUDA: Device: 4 Thread exited with code: 77
CUDA: Device: 2 Thread exited with code: 77
CUDA: Device: 1 Thread exited with code: 77
CUDA: Device: 0 Thread exited with code: 77
ERROR: Some workers are stopped. Attempt to restart: 1
CUDA: Device: 0 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 1 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 2 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 3 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 4 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 0 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 1 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 2 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 3 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 4 Thread exited with code: 46
ERROR: Some workers are stopped. Attempt to restart: 2
CUDA: Device: 0 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 0 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 1 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 1 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 2 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 2 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 3 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 3 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 4 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 4 Thread exited with code: 46

Getting the same thing on two different rigs with 1060's and 1070's, I've tried 1.0 and 2.0 it doesn't seem to make a difference which one I'm running. I'd also like to add that this doesn't happen right away, the miner works fine for 5-10 minutes first before this happens. The cards run valley benchmark just fine for hours but I removed all overclocking anyway to eliminate possibilities per EWBF's suggestion. Any other ideas would be much appreciated, having two rigs down is a big waste of resources.

Try solver 2 or 1.

_javi_

hero member

Activity: 968

Merit: 624

Still a manic miner

Quote from: laik2 on January 23, 2017, 05:04:06 AM

Test them one by one, there is one particular card that crashes on default settings.

Quote from: dtawom on January 23, 2017, 05:00:51 AM

Quote from: bason on December 26, 2016, 10:04:27 PM

Quote

CUDA: Device: 3 Thread exited with code: 77
CUDA: Device: 4 Thread exited with code: 77
CUDA: Device: 2 Thread exited with code: 77
CUDA: Device: 1 Thread exited with code: 77
CUDA: Device: 0 Thread exited with code: 77
ERROR: Some workers are stopped. Attempt to restart: 1
CUDA: Device: 0 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 1 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 2 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 3 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 4 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 0 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 1 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 2 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 3 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 4 Thread exited with code: 46
ERROR: Some workers are stopped. Attempt to restart: 2
CUDA: Device: 0 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 0 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 1 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 1 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 2 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 2 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 3 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 3 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 4 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 4 Thread exited with code: 46

Getting the same thing on two different rigs with 1060's and 1070's, I've tried 1.0 and 2.0 it doesn't seem to make a difference which one I'm running. The cards run valley benchmark just fine for hours but I removed all overclocking anyway to eliminate possibilities per EWBF's suggestion. Any other ideas would be much appreciated, having two rigs down is a big waste of resources.

i have the same exact issue in 3 different rigs. I quit using EWBF for this error. The rigs work fine with EQM or mining any other algo.

Win 7 64b
4gb ram
Sempron 145
latest nvidia drivers

m1n1ngP4d4w4n

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

CryptoLearner

Quote from: dtawom on January 23, 2017, 05:00:51 AM

Getting the same thing on two different rigs with 1060's and 1070's, I've tried 1.0 and 2.0 it doesn't seem to make a difference which one I'm running. The cards run valley benchmark just fine for hours but I removed all overclocking anyway to eliminate possibilities per EWBF's suggestion. Any other ideas would be much appreciated, having two rigs down is a big waste of resources.

OS ?
Drivers version ?
GPU's brand / model ?
Motherboard ?
Psu ?
type of risers ?
overall hardware config (especially how you connected everything, and especially power)
Command line to start miner ? (you can hide wallet/user)
Do you start miner in admin mode (if you aren't loggued as admin)

You said you tested with benchmark but they usually only run on main GPU or if you have SLI, have you tested cards one by one in main GPU slot of the mobo, also you didn't activated sli at all right ? (software or hardware with the bridge)

laik2

sr. member

Activity: 652

Merit: 266

Test them one by one, there is one particular card that crashes on default settings.

Quote from: dtawom on January 23, 2017, 05:00:51 AM

Quote from: bason on December 26, 2016, 10:04:27 PM

Quote

CUDA: Device: 3 Thread exited with code: 77
CUDA: Device: 4 Thread exited with code: 77
CUDA: Device: 2 Thread exited with code: 77
CUDA: Device: 1 Thread exited with code: 77
CUDA: Device: 0 Thread exited with code: 77
ERROR: Some workers are stopped. Attempt to restart: 1
CUDA: Device: 0 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 1 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 2 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 3 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 4 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 0 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 1 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 2 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 3 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 4 Thread exited with code: 46
ERROR: Some workers are stopped. Attempt to restart: 2
CUDA: Device: 0 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 0 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 1 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 1 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 2 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 2 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 3 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 3 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 4 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 4 Thread exited with code: 46

Getting the same thing on two different rigs with 1060's and 1070's, I've tried 1.0 and 2.0 it doesn't seem to make a difference which one I'm running. The cards run valley benchmark just fine for hours but I removed all overclocking anyway to eliminate possibilities per EWBF's suggestion. Any other ideas would be much appreciated, having two rigs down is a big waste of resources.

dtawom

newbie

Activity: 21

Merit: 0

Quote from: bason on December 26, 2016, 10:04:27 PM

Quote

CUDA: Device: 3 Thread exited with code: 77
CUDA: Device: 4 Thread exited with code: 77
CUDA: Device: 2 Thread exited with code: 77
CUDA: Device: 1 Thread exited with code: 77
CUDA: Device: 0 Thread exited with code: 77
ERROR: Some workers are stopped. Attempt to restart: 1
CUDA: Device: 0 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 1 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 2 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 3 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 4 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 0 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 1 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 2 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 3 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 4 Thread exited with code: 46
ERROR: Some workers are stopped. Attempt to restart: 2
CUDA: Device: 0 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 0 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 1 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 1 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 2 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 2 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 3 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 3 Thread exited with code: 46
CUDA: Device: 4 GeForce GTX 1070, 8192 MB M0
CUDA: Device: 4 Thread exited with code: 46

Getting the same thing on two different rigs with 1060's and 1070's, I've tried 1.0 and 2.0 it doesn't seem to make a difference which one I'm running. I'd also like to add that this doesn't happen right away, the miner works fine for 5-10 minutes first before this happens. The cards run valley benchmark just fine for hours but I removed all overclocking anyway to eliminate possibilities per EWBF's suggestion. Any other ideas would be much appreciated, having two rigs down is a big waste of resources.

m1n1ngP4d4w4n

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

CryptoLearner

Not really useful to boost mem for Zcash, better lower mem, and increase core. I run 150-155/595 (depending on card)

ivcelmik

sr. member

Activity: 519

Merit: 250

Quote from: LarryL on January 22, 2017, 10:12:16 PM

Quote from: Dr_Victor on January 22, 2017, 02:34:46 AM

Quote from: LarryL on January 21, 2017, 09:17:31 PM

here are my stats (gigabyte 1070 g1 gaming):

455-465 sol/s

Do screenshot of gpu in working mode, pls.

U can give +750 to mem it works

m1n1ngP4d4w4n

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

CryptoLearner

Quote from: painmaker on January 23, 2017, 02:09:37 AM

snip

ewbf 020 works nicely for me and its perfomance (excluding the dev-fee) is at least on par with nh-miner on my gtx9X0 cards and slightly better on my old gtx7X0 cards. it's been running rock-stable here and i like the face that i don't need to care about starting multiple threads per gpu to fully load the gpus.
i'd love to see some easily parseable stats returned (like: running/[...], submitted shares, avg. sol/s current sol/s, runtime, current diff, pool-url. in csv or json?) on some signal as i consider it cleaner than parsing output.
so my sincere appeciation to the dev for this nice piece of software!

cheers!

Yes this is the rigs frame i was speaking about Wink

Well you can use the log, to get those information, with some smart parsing, i asked EWBF several time to add API into his miner to be able to monitor it properly (like ccminer), i hope it's in the work, aside from thread support (even if with latest version this seems less crucial but still) this is one of the big feature missing from this miner imho.

painmaker

member

Activity: 71

Merit: 10

Quote from: m1n1ngP4d4w4n on January 20, 2017, 04:14:10 AM

[SNIP]
I built the rigs frame myself, inspired and took ideas from alot of videos, images of others rigs owners, and a bit of my own ingenuity. For smaller frames you could think about building something along the way of https://miningcave.com/product/mc-buffalo-98-sk1/ the design is pretty nice and compact for a 4x gpu rig (they also have bigger one), you can also check the rigporn thread on this forum, gave me lots of ideas.
[SNIP]

thats what i've been aiming for as well, thanks for the hints.
your miningcave-link doesn't work for me (404) but i guess these aren't far from what you meant:

i am aware of the rigporn-thread as well but there is just too much noise in it Wink

anyway, before i'm further off-topicin' this thread:
ewbf 020 works nicely for me and its perfomance (excluding the dev-fee) is at least on par with nh-miner on my gtx9X0 cards and slightly better on my old gtx7X0 cards. it's been running rock-stable here and i like the face that i don't need to care about starting multiple threads per gpu to fully load the gpus.
i'd love to see some easily parseable stats returned (like: running/[...], submitted shares, avg. sol/s current sol/s, runtime, current diff, pool-url. in csv or json?) on some signal as i consider it cleaner than parsing output.
so my sincere appeciation to the dev for this nice piece of software!

cheers!

m1n1ngP4d4w4n

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

CryptoLearner

Quote from: mrtrodonet on January 22, 2017, 07:04:26 PM

Could you please point me to the readme file. I grabbed a zip file from the first post in this thread and information there was not very descriptive. Thank you!

Also Can someone explain me what i should set the difficulty to on flypool (password parameter)? When i used default, which is set to 2000, it seemed to mine slower than when i set it to 1500. What's the theory behind it ? Thank you

Just do a "miner --help" you will get the miner help Wink

I don't set difficulty at all @ flypool, let the vardiff do it's stuff, and yes of course if the difficulty increase for the same hashing power your mining will be "slower" as in slower to send back share into pool because it will take more time to be hashed

But in fact the share you send it more valuable because it's difficulty was higher, so the only thing it does, is save network time & transaction (instead of sending 10 worthless share, in the same amount of time it send only 1 that is the same value as those 10 worthless shares), your hashing power is the same always.

LarryL

jr. member

Activity: 59

Merit: 10

Quote from: Dr_Victor on January 22, 2017, 02:34:46 AM

Quote from: LarryL on January 21, 2017, 09:17:31 PM

here are my stats (gigabyte 1070 g1 gaming):

455-465 sol/s

Do screenshot of gpu in working mode, pls.

mrtrodonet

newbie

Activity: 14

Merit: 0

Quote from: m1n1ngP4d4w4n on January 22, 2017, 11:09:16 AM

Quote from: mrtrodonet on January 22, 2017, 10:26:39 AM

I'm having a problem with the miner.
One of my GPUs reports an error and exits after about 6000 shares. The GPU becomes unavailable until i restart the driver or reboot the system.
As a result from this point on the miner just outputs "Detected New Work" message without actually doing any work for all 4 GPUs.

I tried to use "--eexit on_failure.bat" to instruct the miner to run a script to reboot my rig, however script doesn't get executed.

on_failure.bat:
shutdown -r -f

So there are 2 bugs that I see here:

1)On GPU exit miner should continue processing shares on remaining GPUs
2)On GPU exit error --eexit instruction should get executed. (You probably don't treat it as a terminal condition, however IMHO it should be)

Or am I not using the --eexit correctly?

Here is how i run it:
start cmd /k call miner --eexit on_failure.bat --solver 0 --server us1-zcash.flypool.org --port 3333 --user address.w1 --cuda_devices 0 --pass 1500

Thank you

Too much overclock on that GPU make it crash after a while.

Also no you don't use the right way with --eexit, you need to indicate a level of exit (check the miner help for that) and then you need to put it throught a loop, look a few pages back i already posted an example. good luck

Could you please point me to the readme file. I grabbed a zip file from the first post in this thread and information there was not very descriptive. Thank you!

Also Can someone explain me what i should set the difficulty to on flypool (password parameter)? When i used default, which is set to 2000, it seemed to mine slower than when i set it to 1500. What's the theory behind it ? Thank you

Velgelm

sr. member

Activity: 299

Merit: 250

:restart
miner xxx -yyy -zzz
goto :restart

m1n1ngP4d4w4n

full member

Activity: 224

Merit: 100

CryptoLearner

Quote from: mrtrodonet on January 22, 2017, 10:26:39 AM

I'm having a problem with the miner.
One of my GPUs reports an error and exits after about 6000 shares. The GPU becomes unavailable until i restart the driver or reboot the system.
As a result from this point on the miner just outputs "Detected New Work" message without actually doing any work for all 4 GPUs.

I tried to use "--eexit on_failure.bat" to instruct the miner to run a script to reboot my rig, however script doesn't get executed.

on_failure.bat:
shutdown -r -f

So there are 2 bugs that I see here:

1)On GPU exit miner should continue processing shares on remaining GPUs
2)On GPU exit error --eexit instruction should get executed. (You probably don't treat it as a terminal condition, however IMHO it should be)

Or am I not using the --eexit correctly?

Here is how i run it:
start cmd /k call miner --eexit on_failure.bat --solver 0 --server us1-zcash.flypool.org --port 3333 --user address.w1 --cuda_devices 0 --pass 1500

Thank you

Too much overclock on that GPU make it crash after a while.

Also no you don't use the right way with --eexit, you need to indicate a level of exit (check the miner help for that) and then you need to put it throught a loop, look a few pages back i already posted an example. good luck

mrtrodonet

newbie

Activity: 14

Merit: 0

I'm having a problem with the miner.
One of my GPUs reports an error and exits after about 6000 shares. The GPU becomes unavailable until i restart the driver or reboot the system.
As a result from this point on the miner just outputs "Detected New Work" message without actually doing any work for all 4 GPUs.

I tried to use "--eexit on_failure.bat" to instruct the miner to run a script to reboot my rig, however script doesn't get executed.

on_failure.bat:
shutdown -r -f

So there are 2 bugs that I see here:

1)On GPU exit miner should continue processing shares on remaining GPUs
2)On GPU exit error --eexit instruction should get executed. (You probably don't treat it as a terminal condition, however IMHO it should be)

Or am I not using the --eexit correctly?

Here is how i run it:
start cmd /k call miner --eexit on_failure.bat --solver 0 --server us1-zcash.flypool.org --port 3333 --user address.w1 --cuda_devices 0 --pass 1500

Thank you

R1PC

newbie

Activity: 2

Merit: 0

My stats 3x MSI GeForce GTX 1070
Gaming X http://imgur.com/a/zVbl5 http://imgur.com/a/jhPmI

Dr_Victor

sr. member

Activity: 954

Merit: 250

Quote from: LarryL on January 21, 2017, 09:17:31 PM

here are my stats (gigabyte 1070 g1 gaming):

455-465 sol/s

Do screenshot of gpu in working mode, pls.

LarryL

jr. member

Activity: 59

Merit: 10

here are my stats (gigabyte 1070 g1 gaming):

455-465 sol/s

bughatti

full member

Activity: 154

Merit: 100

It's not 150 w per card, it's 100 to 110 and I got the cards at less than 200. It may be ineffective in your eyes and compared to your gear but it's making a profit for me at .05 kwh in electricity. It's an argument that's been around for a while and really it's up to the user what they choose to spend vs profit. As long as it's not a loss it's fine. I may go down the route of other cards but this is my first rig qnd I just started learning about mining 2 weeks ago so it is what I felt comfortable with spending.

Topic: EWBF's CUDA Zcash miner - page 218. (Read 2164327 times)