how do you measure 1.5% increase in performance when hashing speed is not constant ? 
It's need several hours to measure. 
Topic: Gateless Gate Sharp 1.3.8: 30Mh/s (Ethash) on RX 480! - page 140. (Read 214431 times)
how do you measure 1.5% increase in performance when hashing speed is not constant ?
On Linux with my Rx470 I get 29.3Mh with sgminer-gm 5.5.5 (xI:1155) while gg does 29.0 (with xI:2304 to keep HW errors under control). Claymore gets ~30.3, so we know there is room to improve ethash-new.
There is - but not a ton. I can get ~1.5% more than Claymore's, but that's about it.
Which is quite good considering 32Mh/s is the absolute maximum possible with memory clocked at 2GHz if there was no refresh overhead and no channel contention.
Release it closed source with a 0.5% fee, and I think you'd do well.
Besides absolute performance I think there's room to improve power efficiency. To get [email protected] you probably need to run the core at 1150-1175Mhz. 31Mh/s uses 248GB/s of L2 bandwidth, which can theoretically be achieved with a 970Mhz core (64 bytes/L2 channel per core clock * 4 channels). I've been playing around with CU utilization (disabling CUs and just running kernels on a limited number of CUs), and while using 8 of 32 CUs I only see a 1% hit on memory throughput. Power reduction isn't very impressive, but I'm still figuring things out.
last miner claymore 9.1 too unstable, loses power from 28.9 down to 21, 19 mh / s, virtually cagae ago, I tried all settings, nothing to do, I do not know whether to blame the miner or the nanoopol,, the fact is that there is more stability in miners, perhaps better than clayore stops doble miner and focuses only on single
claymore no offense, maybe after a while you get to a point that you can no longer go on, then focus only on stability and keep off speed
not sure if you should try talking to claymore here:)claymore no offense, maybe after a while you get to a point that you can no longer go on, then focus only on stability and keep off speed
I had (hopefully that is) various issues with v9 rate at the pool side. For me the switch to a newer version also coincided with moving some of my hash through proxy which made things even more complicated. however now with 9.1 after getting rid of mem errors(it never was an issue for me earlier) completely and adding some more juice to the cards it seems to be doing fine. And well obviously the DCR hash is almost doubled.
.
I just need more people to mine with the fee on.
At the current pace, I would be making an impressive $3/month. LOL
https://ethermine.org/miners/91fa32e00b0f365d629fb625182a83fed61f0642/payouts
I just need more people to mine with the fee on.
At the current pace, I would be making an impressive $3/month. LOL
https://ethermine.org/miners/91fa32e00b0f365d629fb625182a83fed61f0642/payouts
you wish you would!
I'd say this looks shameful.
The problem is performance. On Linux with my Rx470 I get 29.3Mh with sgminer-gm 5.5.5 (xI:1155) while gg does 29.0 (with xI:2304 to keep HW errors under control). Claymore gets ~30.3, so we know there is room to improve ethash-new.
last miner claymore 9.1 too unstable, loses power from 28.9 down to 21, 19 mh / s, virtually cagae ago, I tried all settings, nothing to do, I do not know whether to blame the miner or the nanoopol,, the fact is that there is more stability in miners, perhaps better than clayore stops doble miner and focuses only on single
claymore no offense, maybe after a while you get to a point that you can no longer go on, then focus only on stability and keep off speed
claymore no offense, maybe after a while you get to a point that you can no longer go on, then focus only on stability and keep off speed
.
I just need more people to mine with the fee on.
At the current pace, I would be making an impressive $3/month. LOL
https://ethermine.org/miners/91fa32e00b0f365d629fb625182a83fed61f0642/payouts
I just need more people to mine with the fee on.
At the current pace, I would be making an impressive $3/month. LOL
https://ethermine.org/miners/91fa32e00b0f365d629fb625182a83fed61f0642/payouts
you wish you would!
I'd say this looks shameful.
The problem is performance. On Linux with my Rx470 I get 29.3Mh with sgminer-gm 5.5.5 (xI:1155) while gg does 29.0 (with xI:2304 to keep HW errors under control). Claymore gets ~30.3, so we know there is room to improve ethash-new.
.
I just need more people to mine with the fee on.
At the current pace, I would be making an impressive $3/month. LOL
https://ethermine.org/miners/91fa32e00b0f365d629fb625182a83fed61f0642/payouts
I just need more people to mine with the fee on.
At the current pace, I would be making an impressive $3/month. LOL
https://ethermine.org/miners/91fa32e00b0f365d629fb625182a83fed61f0642/payouts
you wish you would!
I'd say this looks shameful.
Any solutions for pools with different stratums?
When log says:
[18:10:55] Stratum Error: {
"code": -3,
"message": "Method not found"
}
[18:10:55] Closing main socket
[18:10:55] Stratum Error: {
"code": -3,
"message": "Method not found"
}
[18:10:55] Closing socket for stratum main
I was not able to do this from miner to eth,
if some kind soul could post the string of his bat file I copy
if some kind soul could post the string of his bat file I copy
use this config - https://github.com/zawawawa/gatelessgate/blob/master/Core/gatelessgate-Ethereum.conf
I was not able to do this from miner to eth,
if some kind soul could post the string of his bat file I copy
if some kind soul could post the string of his bat file I copy
I was quite busy as I was traveling abroad to visit my family.
I finally got a few day window to work on the miner.
Let's see what I can do with my father's old computer...
v0.1.3-pre6b - any news?I finally got a few day window to work on the miner.
Let's see what I can do with my father's old computer...
Looks like an updated port on the XMR config from https://github.com/zawawawa/gatelessgate/commits/master
hey guys, what are the best/recommended polaris cards settings for different algos for this miner?
what is it developed on, stock?
what is it developed on, stock?
I was quite busy as I was traveling abroad to visit my family.
I finally got a few day window to work on the miner.
Let's see what I can do with my father's old computer...
v0.1.3-pre6b - any news? I finally got a few day window to work on the miner.
Let's see what I can do with my father's old computer...
I was quite busy as I was traveling abroad to visit my family.
I finally got a few day window to work on the miner.
Let's see what I can do with my father's old computer...
I finally got a few day window to work on the miner.
Let's see what I can do with my father's old computer...
It's too quiet here... 
Hmm, interesting... I am traveling around right now, but I should be able to access RX 470 tonight.
I really should get a laptop with an AMD APU..
I really should get a laptop with an AMD APU..
The thing about SA's Python implementation is that it does not work well at all on Windows.
In fact, the miner got faster by 10% just by switching from SA to sgminer-gm while keeping the same Equihash kernel.
I am not entirely satisfied with sgminer as I said before, and I will probably write my own backend and user-interface in Clojure in a long run.
In fact, the miner got faster by 10% just by switching from SA to sgminer-gm while keeping the same Equihash kernel.
I am not entirely satisfied with sgminer as I said before, and I will probably write my own backend and user-interface in Clojure in a long run.
Python on Windows always has been a less than preferable situation. Haven't personally run silentarmy on anything but Linux so I can't comment as to what the root cause of that would be. The solver and work distributor being separate was what made it have those characteristics I described earlier.
Clojure is an not a great choice imo. It's difficult for outsiders to approach, requires a JVM, and runs slower than Java in benchmarks. It's your thread and project, just my two cents.
Give 4 threads a go one day on sgminer. One card is randomly selected to display roughly double the rate it should be getting (even though the 5s and avg show otherwise) on my 3 card rig.
3 threads and xI 673 give the highest hash rate from my testing.
I will definitely try 3 threads on Linux later. Thanks! As for Clojure, the only performance issue I see is the slow startup time, which should not affect the overall performance of the miner. Also, I am way more productive in this language and its cross-platform support for multi-threading is excellent. The obscurity of the language and JVM requirement are real drawbacks, but they are trade-offs I am willing to make. In any case, switching to Clojure is a long shot, and it will be a sub-project to work on in my spare time, if there is any, for the foreseeable future.
Single card it runs great but my very week cpu's in my 4 card rigs are having issues.
Ah, high CPU usage explains higher power consumption, too. I will get to it today.
ghm... don't think so...
The thing about SA's Python implementation is that it does not work well at all on Windows.
In fact, the miner got faster by 10% just by switching from SA to sgminer-gm while keeping the same Equihash kernel.
I am not entirely satisfied with sgminer as I said before, and I will probably write my own backend and user-interface in Clojure in a long run.
In fact, the miner got faster by 10% just by switching from SA to sgminer-gm while keeping the same Equihash kernel.
I am not entirely satisfied with sgminer as I said before, and I will probably write my own backend and user-interface in Clojure in a long run.
Python on Windows always has been a less than preferable situation. Haven't personally run silentarmy on anything but Linux so I can't comment as to what the root cause of that would be. The solver and work distributor being separate was what made it have those characteristics I described earlier.
Clojure is an not a great choice imo. It's difficult for outsiders to approach, requires a JVM, and runs slower than Java in benchmarks. It's your thread and project, just my two cents.
Give 4 threads a go one day on sgminer. One card is randomly selected to display roughly double the rate it should be getting (even though the 5s and avg show otherwise) on my 3 card rig.
3 threads and xI 673 give the highest hash rate from my testing.
I will definitely try 3 threads on Linux later. Thanks! As for Clojure, the only performance issue I see is the slow startup time, which should not affect the overall performance of the miner. Also, I am way more productive in this language and its cross-platform support for multi-threading is excellent. The obscurity of the language and JVM requirement are real drawbacks, but they are trade-offs I am willing to make. In any case, switching to Clojure is a long shot, and it will be a sub-project to work on in my spare time, if there is any, for the foreseeable future.
Jump to: