Genesis Mining Presents: SGMiner-GM - now with Zawawa's GG! [Updated 17/01/2017] - page 33.

Quote from: BattleField on September 25, 2016, 01:35:38 PM

I'm getting steady 30MH/s on each Fury X on stock clocks (1050/500). Claymore's can only get about 28MH.
A 390 at 1040Mhz gets 29Mh, with some overclocking I can surely can 32-33MH, but my cards warm up too much. Definitely the best miner out there.

The only issue I can spot is the CPU usage, which makes this miner basically worthless on weak CPUs. I couldn't run it on a single-core AMD CPU and a friend of mine had his rig crashing with a dual core Celeron installed. most mining rigs have very weak CPUs, and if this miner gets updated to support them, I am sure it will get much more traction.

I can fix it with a new binary - just needs to be recompiled against a better pthreads lib.

WILL THE SGMINER-GM RECEIVE UPDATES? --

I run this SGminer on a sensitive 280X rig that is not stable with Claymore and dual mining. Currently, SGminer-gm is running under Ethos 1.1.1 on 4 280X cards, mining at 16.7MH/s at stock clocks. It runs with less heat than either Genoil v1.1.7 or Claymore, and does not crash as often. The CPU is a Haswell Celeron 1820 at 2.7GHz. The rig is not perfectly stable, but it runs.

Are updated binaries gong to be posted for both Linux and Windows? I am hoping that the repository will be an active one. --scryptr

Did you manage to run Claymore´s dual miner stable in Ethos? Setup?

CLAYMORE RUNS IN ETHOS--

On my other rigs, Claymore is very stable. It is easy to set up, but off-topic for this thread. Make a directory for Claymore in the home directory, copy the Linux binaries there, make sure libjansson is installed, and run Claymore as described in the Claymore README!!!.txt. The command "sudo-apt-get-ubuntu install libjansson*" will install all of libjansson. Don't forget the asterisk. And, turn off mining in EthOS with "disallow" and "minestop". If your launch scrypt is ready, launch Claymore.

Just a note: Claymore's README!!!.txt is mistaken for a BASH script in a Linux console. It needs to be renamed with "mv READ*.txt readme.txt". I could not open it to read without renaming it. --scryptr

YIz

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 502

Quote from: YIz on September 25, 2016, 12:17:57 PM

Quote from: Gotottack on September 25, 2016, 09:31:01 AM

Quote from: Arnoldent on September 25, 2016, 07:47:44 AM

Quote from: Gemniet on September 24, 2016, 12:49:30 PM

Quote from: nerdralph on September 25, 2016, 12:16:22 PM

I'm getting steady 30MH/s on each Fury X on stock clocks (1050/500). Claymore's can only get about 28MH.
A 390 at 1040Mhz gets 29Mh, with some overclocking I can surely can 32-33MH, but my cards warm up too much. Definitely the best miner out there.

The only issue I can spot is the CPU usage, which makes this miner basically worthless on weak CPUs. I couldn't run it on a single-core AMD CPU and a friend of mine had his rig crashing with a dual core Celeron installed. most mining rigs have very weak CPUs, and if this miner gets updated to support them, I am sure it will get much more traction.

What is the configuration of your R9 Fury?

I included it in the post - 1050/500. stock clocks, didn't change anything.

What is your sgminer setting? For example, gpu threads, work size or the intensity values. do you have lots of hard ware error?

Code:

"gpu-powertune": "0",
"worksize": "192",
"name": "eth",
"algorithm": "ethash",
"gpu-threads": "1",
"xintensity": "1024"

Those are the settings, the intensity doesn't change much on both 512 and 256. 30Mh/s on stock clocks, no errors whatsoever.

Do you mean there is no hardware error?

I have R9 nano cards, with xintensity of 256 and work size of 64. there are tons of HW.

What is an hardware error? does the miner report it? because it runs okay here. there is a large number in the "HW:" section of the miner. what does it mean?

That is the hardware error. So even if the reported hash rate is high, with the large HW, your effective rate could be low.

The effective hashrate on the pool is what I'm expecting.

toptek

legendary

Activity: 1274

Merit: 1000

after many days of trying different setting this is what i came up with for my power color 280 custom water cooled not the X , i even did a bios edit with VBE7.0.0.7b.exe to lower the voltage to 1.18 i think this card has a locked voltage @ 1.25, after burner doesn't help there .

Code:

sgminer 5.3.0-gm - Started: [2016-09-25 15:20:26] - [0 days 00:02:24]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(5s):18.16M (avg):17.49Mh/s | A:4000000000  R:0  HW:1  WU:23.682/m
ST: 2  SS: 0  NB: 15  LW: 190  GF: 0  RF: 0
Connected to  diff 4G as user
Block: 44ca00cd...  Diff:0  Started: [15:22:29]  Best share: 5.09G
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[P]ool management [G]PU management [S]ettings [D]isplay options [Q]uit
GPU 0:  46.0C  45%    | 18.09M/17.49Mh/s | R:  0.0% HW:1 WU:24.544/m xI:1024
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[15:20:24] Started sgminer 5.3.0-gm
[15:20:24] * using Jansson 2.7
[15:20:24] Loaded configuration file awesome.conf
[15:20:24] Probing for an alive pool
[15:20:24] Startup GPU initialization... Using settings from pool us1.ethermine.org.
[15:20:24] Startup Pool No = 0
[15:20:24] Building binary ethashTahitigw64l4.bin
[15:20:25] Initialising kernel ethash.cl with nfactor 10, n 1024
[15:20:26] API running in IP access mode on port 4029 (15364)
[15:21:28] Accepted 82a43e75 Diff 5.09G/4G GPU 0

sgminer.conf I use, i get the lest HW errors with these setting , so Fair. I'm all ways trying different setting.

Code:

{
   "pools": [{
        "url": "stratum+tcp://stratumpool.address:port",
        "user": "ethaddress",
        "pass": "x"
   }],
    "profiles": [{
        "gpu-powertune": "20",
        "worksize": "64",
        "name": "eth",
        "algorithm": "ethash",
        "gpu-threads": "1",
        "xintensity": "1024"
    }],
     "no-extranonce": "true",
     "default-profile": "eth",
     "api-allow": "W:127.0.0.1/24,W:192.168.1.0/24",
     "temp-target": "72",
    "auto-gpu": true,
    "gpu-engine" : "1150",
    "gpu-memclock" : "1500",
    "gpu-fan": "45-85",
    "api-port": "4029",
    "temp-cutoff": "82",
    "api-listen": true,
    "auto-fan": true,
    "temp-overheat": "80"
}

I have awesome miner managing it.

next my two MSI Radeon R7 370 2G not water cooled and old 7870 custom water cooled , hope to have this time next month, 1 480 and 1 470.

o yea i also mine XMR while while mining ETH with 4 and 8 core CPU's. that's a whole new tweak thing , I'll do once I have this down.

Rugtilf

newbie

Activity: 33

Merit: 0

Can anyone tell me if this miner does stale share submits? It didn't look like it does, and maybe someone can save me the trouble of digging through the source code.

It does submit the stale shares. I saw in the command window, it says stale share detected, submitting.

BattleField

jr. member

Activity: 62

Merit: 2

Quote from: YIz on September 25, 2016, 12:17:57 PM

Quote from: Gotottack on September 25, 2016, 09:31:01 AM

Quote from: Arnoldent on September 25, 2016, 07:47:44 AM

Quote from: Gemniet on September 24, 2016, 12:49:30 PM

Quote from: Gotottack on September 25, 2016, 09:31:01 AM

I'm getting steady 30MH/s on each Fury X on stock clocks (1050/500). Claymore's can only get about 28MH.
A 390 at 1040Mhz gets 29Mh, with some overclocking I can surely can 32-33MH, but my cards warm up too much. Definitely the best miner out there.

The only issue I can spot is the CPU usage, which makes this miner basically worthless on weak CPUs. I couldn't run it on a single-core AMD CPU and a friend of mine had his rig crashing with a dual core Celeron installed. most mining rigs have very weak CPUs, and if this miner gets updated to support them, I am sure it will get much more traction.

What is the configuration of your R9 Fury?

I included it in the post - 1050/500. stock clocks, didn't change anything.

What is your sgminer setting? For example, gpu threads, work size or the intensity values. do you have lots of hard ware error?

Code:

"gpu-powertune": "0",
"worksize": "192",
"name": "eth",
"algorithm": "ethash",
"gpu-threads": "1",
"xintensity": "1024"

Those are the settings, the intensity doesn't change much on both 512 and 256. 30Mh/s on stock clocks, no errors whatsoever.

Do you mean there is no hardware error?

I have R9 nano cards, with xintensity of 256 and work size of 64. there are tons of HW.

What is an hardware error? does the miner report it? because it runs okay here. there is a large number in the "HW:" section of the miner. what does it mean?

That is the hardware error. So even if the reported hash rate is high, with the large HW, your effective rate could be low.

YIz

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 502

Quote from: Arnoldent on September 25, 2016, 07:47:44 AM

Quote from: Gemniet on September 24, 2016, 12:49:30 PM

Quote from: kilo17 on September 24, 2016, 01:05:56 AM

I'm getting steady 30MH/s on each Fury X on stock clocks (1050/500). Claymore's can only get about 28MH.
A 390 at 1040Mhz gets 29Mh, with some overclocking I can surely can 32-33MH, but my cards warm up too much. Definitely the best miner out there.

The only issue I can spot is the CPU usage, which makes this miner basically worthless on weak CPUs. I couldn't run it on a single-core AMD CPU and a friend of mine had his rig crashing with a dual core Celeron installed. most mining rigs have very weak CPUs, and if this miner gets updated to support them, I am sure it will get much more traction.

What is the configuration of your R9 Fury?

I included it in the post - 1050/500. stock clocks, didn't change anything.

What is your sgminer setting? For example, gpu threads, work size or the intensity values. do you have lots of hard ware error?

Code:

"gpu-powertune": "0",
"worksize": "192",
"name": "eth",
"algorithm": "ethash",
"gpu-threads": "1",
"xintensity": "1024"

Those are the settings, the intensity doesn't change much on both 512 and 256. 30Mh/s on stock clocks, no errors whatsoever.

Do you mean there is no hardware error?

I have R9 nano cards, with xintensity of 256 and work size of 64. there are tons of HW.

What is an hardware error? does the miner report it? because it runs okay here. there is a large number in the "HW:" section of the miner. what does it mean?

Wolf0

member

Activity: 81

Merit: 1002

It was only the wind.

Quote from: Wolf0 on September 23, 2016, 07:14:50 PM

Quote from: antantti on September 23, 2016, 06:15:09 PM

Quote from: Wolf0 on September 22, 2016, 07:34:37 PM

https://ottrbutt.com/miner/downloads/sgminer-gm/sgminer-gm-wolf-09222016.zip
https://ottrbutt.com/miner/downloads/sgminer-gm/sgminer-gm-wolf-09222016.zip.sig

Your latest opensource xmr & dagger are doing pretty well.

83865df367809a7c143afe2b9cf7590643ddbe70d302d68828d7581d69250497

Should be integrated soon.

I REALLY appreciate the kernel Wolf- I tuned with it not thinking it would make a huge difference since on short runs of less than an hour it doesn't show much difference (unless HW are high). After tuning the intensity & worksize for a 390 and running it for a continuous 24 hours here are my results: I am running it at 1100/1250 (forgive the name of the rig- I wanted something that would stand out from the other names - Grin

)

On Claymore in Solo mode I averaged 31.1 at best.

I big question that I was hoping you could shed some light on:
On a Rx 480 (8gb) - I get 29.3 with a low power Bios Mod and cannot get above 26.3 with this kernel. It seems to run about 26 on an unmodded Rx 480 as well. Is it a mem timing issue or the lower core (or is it the code)

btw- I am a man of my word and as soon as I get it on all my rigs I will send the tip Cool

. I have uploaded it to 4 rigs and will see how they perform over 24 hours

LOL, you should see my worker names.

nerdralph

sr. member

Activity: 588

Merit: 251

Can anyone tell me if this miner does stale share submits? It didn't look like it does, and maybe someone can save me the trouble of digging through the source code.

Gotottack

hero member

Activity: 882

Merit: 506

Quote from: Arnoldent on September 25, 2016, 07:47:44 AM

Quote from: Gemniet on September 24, 2016, 12:49:30 PM

Quote from: scryptr on September 22, 2016, 02:28:15 PM

I'm getting steady 30MH/s on each Fury X on stock clocks (1050/500). Claymore's can only get about 28MH.
A 390 at 1040Mhz gets 29Mh, with some overclocking I can surely can 32-33MH, but my cards warm up too much. Definitely the best miner out there.

The only issue I can spot is the CPU usage, which makes this miner basically worthless on weak CPUs. I couldn't run it on a single-core AMD CPU and a friend of mine had his rig crashing with a dual core Celeron installed. most mining rigs have very weak CPUs, and if this miner gets updated to support them, I am sure it will get much more traction.

What is the configuration of your R9 Fury?

I included it in the post - 1050/500. stock clocks, didn't change anything.

What is your sgminer setting? For example, gpu threads, work size or the intensity values. do you have lots of hard ware error?

Code:

"gpu-powertune": "0",
"worksize": "192",
"name": "eth",
"algorithm": "ethash",
"gpu-threads": "1",
"xintensity": "1024"

Those are the settings, the intensity doesn't change much on both 512 and 256. 30Mh/s on stock clocks, no errors whatsoever.

Do you mean there is no hardware error?

I have R9 nano cards, with xintensity of 256 and work size of 64. there are tons of HW.

fran2k

hero member

Activity: 784

Merit: 500

Nice release guys, will test asap.

Quote from: Wolf0 on September 22, 2016, 10:08:00 AM

Quote from: Arnoldent on September 25, 2016, 07:47:44 AM

I'm getting steady 30MH/s on each Fury X on stock clocks (1050/500). Claymore's can only get about 28MH.
A 390 at 1040Mhz gets 29Mh, with some overclocking I can surely can 32-33MH, but my cards warm up too much. Definitely the best miner out there.

The only issue I can spot is the CPU usage, which makes this miner basically worthless on weak CPUs. I couldn't run it on a single-core AMD CPU and a friend of mine had his rig crashing with a dual core Celeron installed. most mining rigs have very weak CPUs, and if this miner gets updated to support them, I am sure it will get much more traction.

I can fix it with a new binary - just needs to be recompiled against a better pthreads lib.

WILL THE SGMINER-GM RECEIVE UPDATES? --

I run this SGminer on a sensitive 280X rig that is not stable with Claymore and dual mining. Currently, SGminer-gm is running under Ethos 1.1.1 on 4 280X cards, mining at 16.7MH/s at stock clocks. It runs with less heat than either Genoil v1.1.7 or Claymore, and does not crash as often. The CPU is a Haswell Celeron 1820 at 2.7GHz. The rig is not perfectly stable, but it runs.

Are updated binaries gong to be posted for both Linux and Windows? I am hoping that the repository will be an active one. --scryptr

Did you manage to run Claymore´s dual miner stable in Ethos? Setup?

YIz

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 502

Quote from: Gemniet on September 24, 2016, 12:49:30 PM

I'm getting steady 30MH/s on each Fury X on stock clocks (1050/500). Claymore's can only get about 28MH.
A 390 at 1040Mhz gets 29Mh, with some overclocking I can surely can 32-33MH, but my cards warm up too much. Definitely the best miner out there.

The only issue I can spot is the CPU usage, which makes this miner basically worthless on weak CPUs. I couldn't run it on a single-core AMD CPU and a friend of mine had his rig crashing with a dual core Celeron installed. most mining rigs have very weak CPUs, and if this miner gets updated to support them, I am sure it will get much more traction.

What is the configuration of your R9 Fury?

I included it in the post - 1050/500. stock clocks, didn't change anything.

What is your sgminer setting? For example, gpu threads, work size or the intensity values. do you have lots of hard ware error?

Code:

"gpu-powertune": "0",
"worksize": "192",
"name": "eth",
"algorithm": "ethash",
"gpu-threads": "1",
"xintensity": "1024"

Those are the settings, the intensity doesn't change much on both 512 and 256. 30Mh/s on stock clocks, no errors whatsoever.

Arnoldent

newbie

Activity: 64

Merit: 0

Quote from: Gemniet on September 24, 2016, 12:49:30 PM

Quote from: kilo17 on September 25, 2016, 04:24:19 AM

I'm getting steady 30MH/s on each Fury X on stock clocks (1050/500). Claymore's can only get about 28MH.
A 390 at 1040Mhz gets 29Mh, with some overclocking I can surely can 32-33MH, but my cards warm up too much. Definitely the best miner out there.

The only issue I can spot is the CPU usage, which makes this miner basically worthless on weak CPUs. I couldn't run it on a single-core AMD CPU and a friend of mine had his rig crashing with a dual core Celeron installed. most mining rigs have very weak CPUs, and if this miner gets updated to support them, I am sure it will get much more traction.

What is the configuration of your R9 Fury?

I included it in the post - 1050/500. stock clocks, didn't change anything.

What is your sgminer setting? For example, gpu threads, work size or the intensity values. do you have lots of hard ware error?

michkima

hero member

Activity: 896

Merit: 514

After looking at my HW errors and explaining to someone last night in another thread what xI vs I vs rI it occurred to me that the shotgun approach I was using was flawed.

At the settings I was using I was making the GPU work 10 times harder and essentially getting 33mh by loading up the work and accepting the HW.

So today I used some reasoning- although it is limited by my understanding of "4-way" vs "8-way". The other quote I accepted was the one made by Oh-God-it's a Girl earlier in this thread. SHe stated that HW errors are normal, when in fact they are not normal.

So I started from scratch using the info I have on hand. Global work has been accepted as 16384 or a variation of that number. Plugging that into the xI formula and knowing a 390 has 2818 shaders the xI equivalent would be about 5.81. It decreased the HW works but hashrate is about 20mh. I then decreased the worksize by a factor of 4 to 64 (only because everything in mining is a factor -lol - and we went from 8 way to 4 way) and I increased the the xI by 2^4 and get about 93. Also increase the xI without decreasing the worksize increased HW. Plugging those numbers into the miner I am getting respectable Hash rates of about 28mh on a 390 with 1100/1250 with very few HW.

A little more tweaking and will increase the worksize and double the xI since it appears more threads are available with this miner using 4-way (at least I think)

What is your GPU thread? one or two threads?

With 1100/1250, you are getting ony 28MH. That is slower than the Claymore miner speed.

kilo17

legendary

Activity: 980

Merit: 1001

aka "whocares"

After looking at my HW errors and explaining to someone last night in another thread what xI vs I vs rI it occurred to me that the shotgun approach I was using was flawed.

At the settings I was using I was making the GPU work 10 times harder and essentially getting 33mh by loading up the work and accepting the HW.

So today I used some reasoning- although it is limited by my understanding of "4-way" vs "8-way". The other quote I accepted was the one made by Oh-God-it's a Girl earlier in this thread. SHe stated that HW errors are normal, when in fact they are not normal.

So I started from scratch using the info I have on hand. Global work has been accepted as 16384 or a variation of that number. Plugging that into the xI formula and knowing a 390 has 2818 shaders the xI equivalent would be about 5.81. It decreased the HW works but hashrate is about 20mh. I then decreased the worksize by a factor of 4 to 64 (only because everything in mining is a factor -lol - and we went from 8 way to 4 way) and I increased the the xI by 2^4 and get about 93. Also increase the xI without decreasing the worksize increased HW. Plugging those numbers into the miner I am getting respectable Hash rates of about 28mh on a 390 with 1100/1250 with very few HW.

A little more tweaking and will increase the worksize and double the xI since it appears more threads are available with this miner using 4-way (at least I think)

kilo17

legendary

Activity: 980

Merit: 1001

aka "whocares"

Quote from: nerdralph on September 24, 2016, 01:20:17 PM

Quote from: kilo17 on September 24, 2016, 01:05:56 AM

[
I REALLY appreciate the kernel Wolf- I tuned with it not thinking it would make a huge difference since on short runs of less than an hour it doesn't show much difference (unless HW are high). After tuning the intensity & worksize for a 390 and running it for a continuous 24 hours here are my results: I am running it at 1100/1250 (forgive the name of the rig- I wanted something that would stand out from the other names - Grin

)

On Claymore in Solo mode I averaged 31.1 at best.

What config are you using for the 390? xintensity, rawintensity?

I still don't have it dialed in as the settings I used on that GPU do not work on a 6 GPU rig - If 1 or 2 cards don't hold the settings the HW errors go way up. It was set at 256/608 xI. Most people I think abandon the settings before seeing the average, it definitely takes 24 hours on ethpool or ethermine to see the true average. Any run less than that will show a dramatic decrease in hashrate. It seems to have big swings for a few hours and then settles down. I may switch to another pool to get a better average in 6-12 hours.

YIz

hero member

Activity: 686

Merit: 502

Quote from: Gemniet on September 24, 2016, 12:49:30 PM