preordered 2 Cards at Work for "Evaluation" 1 x GTX 1070, 1 x GTX 1080.
will report when arrived....
Topic: How will this change the world of mining?? GTX 1080 / 1070 - page 41. (Read 134117 times)
Lets say... tester
As for neoscrypt - it is 300khs - 450khs depending on the version of ccminer - tested both on DJM34 and latest builds - but thats at 100W tdp - obviously it will improve
As for decred - 3300 at 180W tdp
Quark is 35mhs with +150mhz overclock and around 200W tdp
As for neoscrypt - it is 300khs - 450khs depending on the version of ccminer - tested both on DJM34 and latest builds - but thats at 100W tdp - obviously it will improve
As for decred - 3300 at 180W tdp
Quark is 35mhs with +150mhz overclock and around 200W tdp
is this for 1080? what about 1070?
was 110W at 24mhs at Quark
I think it will be the best choice for mining.. or maybe 1060
depends on pricing and final perf 
Lets say... tester
As for neoscrypt - it is 300khs - 450khs depending on the version of ccminer - tested both on DJM34 and latest builds - but thats at 100W tdp - obviously it will improve
As for decred - 3300 at 180W tdp
Quark is 35mhs with +150mhz overclock and around 200W tdp
As for neoscrypt - it is 300khs - 450khs depending on the version of ccminer - tested both on DJM34 and latest builds - but thats at 100W tdp - obviously it will improve
As for decred - 3300 at 180W tdp
Quark is 35mhs with +150mhz overclock and around 200W tdp
is this for 1080? what about 1070?
The 1080 will cost $700, have 2500 shaders and clocked @ 1600mhz.
A used 980ti can be picked up for $400, 2760 shaders and can be oveclocked to 1500mhz stable. (Gigabyte G1 windforce) Quark will draw around 240Watt
The shadercount of the gtx 1070 is unknown.
To benchmark the pascal is easy
compile this sourcecode
https://github.com/tpruvot/ccminer
run it with
ccminer -a quark --benchmark
And then compare it to my modded Maxwell kernal.
Here are the results on the 980ti: (31,8MHASH) (132.5KHASH /Watt)
A used 980ti can be picked up for $400, 2760 shaders and can be oveclocked to 1500mhz stable. (Gigabyte G1 windforce) Quark will draw around 240Watt
The shadercount of the gtx 1070 is unknown.
To benchmark the pascal is easy
compile this sourcecode
https://github.com/tpruvot/ccminer
run it with
ccminer -a quark --benchmark
And then compare it to my modded Maxwell kernal.
Here are the results on the 980ti: (31,8MHASH) (132.5KHASH /Watt)
As I mentioned in other topic
1080 at
Quark - 32Mhs at around ~170W
Ethereum - crashes on Genoil 1.0.7 with "device bit not recognizes" message (smth like that)
With Ocl ethereum miner - 12.5mhs at.. 30w
Neoscrypt is not optimized - 0.450
What do you suggest to test next?
1070
Quark was at 24mhs at 110W
the same for ethereum - 12.5 mhs at 30W
Must be nice to be an insider, loaner or keeper?
The 1070 results don't seem to scale the same as the 1080. Based on the 1080 rate you posted I was
estimating 26 MH/s on the 1070. But the power usage on the 1070 is unexpectedly low compared with
the 970/980 ratio.
Neoscrypt is a curious beast. The original neoscrypt kernel (DJM34) performs better on kepler (780ti specifically)
than the improved Pallas neoscrypt kernel, although pallas' works better on Maxwell, both compiled with cuda 6.5.
Then the Pallas neoscrypt took a big hit when compiled with cuda 7.5. DJM34 took a crack at it and restored much
of the lost hash. Now it appears it's taking another hit on Pascal.
I would suggest trying the original DJM34 neoscrypt (SP_MOD 58) compiled with cuda 6.5, the Pallas kernel compiled with
6.5 & 7.5 and the improved DJM34 (I think that is what you already tested).
Lets say... tester
As for neoscrypt - it is 300khs - 450khs depending on the version of ccminer - tested both on DJM34 and latest builds - but thats at 100W tdp - obviously it will improve
As for decred - 3300 at 180W tdp
Quark is 35mhs with +150mhz overclock and around 200W tdp
They are also much faster up to 50%
but they are so costly for eth mining
but they are so costly for eth mining
Ethereum - crashes on Genoil 1.0.7 with "device bit not recognizes" message (smth like that)
With Ocl ethereum miner - 12.5mhs at.. 30w
Add compute 5.0 and sm 5.0 and rebuild. Then it should work without device messages. The 1.0.7 is buildt with 5.2 only
o did i? well mining eth on compute 5/ windows is pointless anyway. 1080 is Compute 6.0 so i don't know what Compute 5.0 would change to that.
12.5MH/s sounds like good 'ol TLB trashing. If there is a Linux or WDDM 1.x driver (Win 7 or 8.1), I would suggest installing that and try again. Knowing that the 980ti does about 6MH/s currenty while trashing, we may be in for a surprise.
Check Bus Interface Load in GPU-Z. Should be close to 0%. When TLB trashing it becomes high, around 50-60%.
The 1080 will cost $700, have 2500 shaders and clocked @ 1600mhz.
A used 980ti can be picked up for $400, 2760 shaders and can be oveclocked to 1500mhz stable. (Gigabyte G1 windforce) Quark will draw around 240Watt
A used 980ti can be picked up for $400, 2760 shaders and can be oveclocked to 1500mhz stable. (Gigabyte G1 windforce) Quark will draw around 240Watt
GTX 1080 was demonstrated to overclock to over 2 Ghz at the Nvidia demo on stock air cooling in the reference design.
Also, while it has fewer shaders, they're supposed to be more efficient so it's not a straight up comparison.
More importantly, some of my web digging over the last few days (slow at work) came up with references to some architecture changes that might help it noticeably on Ethereum, as they're targeted specifically at improving random access some AND they left the register count alone per processing unit while halfing the Cuda units per, effectively doubling the registers per processing unit - which should help a LOT if TLB register limits are what's holding the higher-end cards back.
Quote
The shadercount of the gtx 1070 is unknown.
2048 per a couple of sites, which matches up well to the comparative benchmarks vs. the 1080, though not OFFICIALLY specified so far.
Quote
Ethereum - crashes on Genoil 1.0.7 with "device bit not recognizes" message (smth like that)
With Ocl ethereum miner - 12.5mhs at.. 30w
What do you suggest to test next?
1070
The same for ethereum - 12.5 mhs at 30W
Ethereum using qtminer
X11 but that's off topic, so post it in "the other thread"?
Ethereum - crashes on Genoil 1.0.7 with "device bit not recognizes" message (smth like that)
With Ocl ethereum miner - 12.5mhs at.. 30w
Add compute 5.0 and sm 5.0 and rebuild. Then it should work without device messages. The 1.0.7 is buildt with 5.2 only
The 1080 will cost $700, have 2500 shaders and clocked @ 1600mhz.
A used 980ti can be picked up for $400, 2760 shaders and can be oveclocked to 1500mhz stable. (Gigabyte G1 windforce) Quark will draw around 240Watt
The shadercount of the gtx 1070 is unknown.
To benchmark the pascal is easy
compile this sourcecode
https://github.com/tpruvot/ccminer
run it with
ccminer -a quark --benchmark
And then compare it to my modded Maxwell kernal.
Here are the results on the 980ti: (31,8MHASH) (132.5KHASH /Watt)
A used 980ti can be picked up for $400, 2760 shaders and can be oveclocked to 1500mhz stable. (Gigabyte G1 windforce) Quark will draw around 240Watt
The shadercount of the gtx 1070 is unknown.
To benchmark the pascal is easy
compile this sourcecode
https://github.com/tpruvot/ccminer
run it with
ccminer -a quark --benchmark
And then compare it to my modded Maxwell kernal.
Here are the results on the 980ti: (31,8MHASH) (132.5KHASH /Watt)
As I mentioned in other topic
1080 at
Quark - 32Mhs at around ~170W
Ethereum - crashes on Genoil 1.0.7 with "device bit not recognizes" message (smth like that)
With Ocl ethereum miner - 12.5mhs at.. 30w
Neoscrypt is not optimized - 0.450
What do you suggest to test next?
1070
Quark was at 24mhs at 110W
the same for ethereum - 12.5 mhs at 30W
it lack optimization, i can not believe that the 1070 do only 12.5 on etheruem, it must be at least double if not more, same for the 1080
and in fact the consumption is too low, because the gpu is not working at max, check the gpu usage please
While you could definitely see some profit on a few current coins, you'd be missing out on the most profitable one to mine at the moment (Ethereum) since Nvidia cards don't work as well as AMD cards on Ethash. Personally, I'm holding out on buying a new card until I get to see how well AMD's newer offerings mine.
According to AMD, the efficiency improvement of the new cards should be similar to that of nVida cards. So we just need to wait for two more months.
While you could definitely see some profit on a few current coins, you'd be missing out on the most profitable one to mine at the moment (Ethereum) since Nvidia cards don't work as well as AMD cards on Ethash. Personally, I'm holding out on buying a new card until I get to see how well AMD's newer offerings mine.
The 1080 will cost $700, have 2500 shaders and clocked @ 1600mhz.
A used 980ti can be picked up for $400, 2760 shaders and can be oveclocked to 1500mhz stable. (Gigabyte G1 windforce) Quark will draw around 240Watt
The shadercount of the gtx 1070 is unknown.
To benchmark the pascal is easy
compile this sourcecode
https://github.com/tpruvot/ccminer
run it with
ccminer -a quark --benchmark
And then compare it to my modded Maxwell kernal.
Here are the results on the 980ti: (31,8MHASH) (132.5KHASH /Watt)
A used 980ti can be picked up for $400, 2760 shaders and can be oveclocked to 1500mhz stable. (Gigabyte G1 windforce) Quark will draw around 240Watt
The shadercount of the gtx 1070 is unknown.
To benchmark the pascal is easy
compile this sourcecode
https://github.com/tpruvot/ccminer
run it with
ccminer -a quark --benchmark
And then compare it to my modded Maxwell kernal.
Here are the results on the 980ti: (31,8MHASH) (132.5KHASH /Watt)
As I mentioned in other topic
1080 at
Quark - 32Mhs at around ~170W
Ethereum - crashes on Genoil 1.0.7 with "device bit not recognizes" message (smth like that)
With Ocl ethereum miner - 12.5mhs at.. 30w
Neoscrypt is not optimized - 0.450
What do you suggest to test next?
1070
Quark was at 24mhs at 110W
the same for ethereum - 12.5 mhs at 30W
Must be nice to be an insider, loaner or keeper?
The 1070 results don't seem to scale the same as the 1080. Based on the 1080 rate you posted I was
estimating 26 MH/s on the 1070. But the power usage on the 1070 is unexpectedly low compared with
the 970/980 ratio.
Neoscrypt is a curious beast. The original neoscrypt kernel (DJM34) performs better on kepler (780ti specifically)
than the improved Pallas neoscrypt kernel, although pallas' works better on Maxwell, both compiled with cuda 6.5.
Then the Pallas neoscrypt took a big hit when compiled with cuda 7.5. DJM34 took a crack at it and restored much
of the lost hash. Now it appears it's taking another hit on Pascal.
I would suggest trying the original DJM34 neoscrypt (SP_MOD 58) compiled with cuda 6.5, the Pallas kernel compiled with
6.5 & 7.5 and the improved DJM34 (I think that is what you already tested).
The 1080 will cost $700, have 2500 shaders and clocked @ 1600mhz.
A used 980ti can be picked up for $400, 2760 shaders and can be oveclocked to 1500mhz stable. (Gigabyte G1 windforce) Quark will draw around 240Watt
The shadercount of the gtx 1070 is unknown.
To benchmark the pascal is easy
compile this sourcecode
https://github.com/tpruvot/ccminer
run it with
ccminer -a quark --benchmark
And then compare it to my modded Maxwell kernal.
Here are the results on the 980ti: (31,8MHASH) (132.5KHASH /Watt)
A used 980ti can be picked up for $400, 2760 shaders and can be oveclocked to 1500mhz stable. (Gigabyte G1 windforce) Quark will draw around 240Watt
The shadercount of the gtx 1070 is unknown.
To benchmark the pascal is easy
compile this sourcecode
https://github.com/tpruvot/ccminer
run it with
ccminer -a quark --benchmark
And then compare it to my modded Maxwell kernal.
Here are the results on the 980ti: (31,8MHASH) (132.5KHASH /Watt)
As I mentioned in other topic
1080 at
Quark - 32Mhs at around ~170W
Ethereum - crashes on Genoil 1.0.7 with "device bit not recognizes" message (smth like that)
With Ocl ethereum miner - 12.5mhs at.. 30w
Neoscrypt is not optimized - 0.450
What do you suggest to test next?
1070
Quark was at 24mhs at 110W
the same for ethereum - 12.5 mhs at 30W
well it'snot fair to compare price at launch, it is known that price after the launch is very high, if you wait some weeks or 1/2 months it will be lower around 600
still worth the lower consumption for those like me that have high electricity cost
still worth the lower consumption for those like me that have high electricity cost
If the price depreciation is low after you spend lots of money to buy the high end price, it is still worth it if the power consumption is low.
well it's not fair to compare price at launch, it is known that price after the launch is very high, if you wait some weeks or 1/2 months it will be lower around 600
still worth the lower consumption for those like me that have high electricity cost
still worth the lower consumption for those like me that have high electricity cost
The 1080 will cost $700, have 2500 shaders and clocked @ 1600mhz.
A used 980ti can be picked up for $400, 2760 shaders and can be oveclocked to 1500mhz stable. (Gigabyte G1 windforce) Quark will draw around 240Watt
The shadercount of the gtx 1070 is unknown.
To benchmark the pascal is easy
compile this sourcecode
https://github.com/tpruvot/ccminer
run it with
ccminer -a quark --benchmark
And then compare it to my modded Maxwell kernal.
Here are the results on the 980ti: (31,8MHASH) (132.5KHASH /Watt)
A used 980ti can be picked up for $400, 2760 shaders and can be oveclocked to 1500mhz stable. (Gigabyte G1 windforce) Quark will draw around 240Watt
The shadercount of the gtx 1070 is unknown.
To benchmark the pascal is easy
compile this sourcecode
https://github.com/tpruvot/ccminer
run it with
ccminer -a quark --benchmark
And then compare it to my modded Maxwell kernal.
Here are the results on the 980ti: (31,8MHASH) (132.5KHASH /Watt)
this does not mean that they will be not faster by 50% in other algo, there is not only ethereum out there
edit, some research lead to a 42% on the access memory, so this is more than 30MH/s versus a 970(22MH/s) with a consumption of 120w versus 160w
so 40% increase in hash and 25% decrese in consumption, very good for me, they will be surely worth 50% more the price
Actual numbers on both sides are likely lower (well, will be for the 10x0) - you're quoting TDP figures but real world Ethereum mining seems to run somewhat under max TDP on my current 9x0 cards (more so on the 960s, which don't seem to be very efficient at Ethereum than on the 950s that hash almost as fast).
Still should be a noticeable power usage drop AND should be at least a small speed increase.
I suspect there might be a small "premium" on the pricing initially, but that should ramp down fairly quickly. Unfortunately, 9xx pricing doesn't seem to have moved yet - guess there's too much stuff in the channel still, and possibly some folks haven't HEARD about the 10x0 being due so soon yet.
PoS date seems to still be up in the air, the issue at this point is the difficulty rampup, apparently at least in part due to more and more folks finding out about Ethereum and pointing rigs at it. I hesitate to wonder what that would be like if it had a 32-bit version, though the limit on required RAM on your vidcard provides SOME limitations (I'd love to point my 7750s at Ethereum, even if they only managed 3-5 MH/s they're CHEAP cards to run).
no, real consumption target is 150 for 1070 and it was 180 for 970, in fact i said 160, because that what i'm consuming now with my 970, and for 1070 would be around 120w, by derivation
i think the difference in the end will be like going from 770 to 970
this does not mean that they will be not faster by 50% in other algo, there is not only ethereum out there
edit, some research lead to a 42% on the access memory, so this is more than 30MH/s versus a 970(22MH/s) with a consumption of 120w versus 160w
so 40% increase in hash and 25% decrese in consumption, very good for me, they will be surely worth 50% more the price
Actual numbers on both sides are likely lower (well, will be for the 10x0) - you're quoting TDP figures but real world Ethereum mining seems to run somewhat under max TDP on my current 9x0 cards (more so on the 960s, which don't seem to be very efficient at Ethereum than on the 950s that hash almost as fast).
Still should be a noticeable power usage drop AND should be at least a small speed increase.
I suspect there might be a small "premium" on the pricing initially, but that should ramp down fairly quickly. Unfortunately, 9xx pricing doesn't seem to have moved yet - guess there's too much stuff in the channel still, and possibly some folks haven't HEARD about the 10x0 being due so soon yet.
PoS date seems to still be up in the air, the issue at this point is the difficulty rampup, apparently at least in part due to more and more folks finding out about Ethereum and pointing rigs at it. I hesitate to wonder what that would be like if it had a 32-bit version, though the limit on required RAM on your vidcard provides SOME limitations (I'd love to point my 7750s at Ethereum, even if they only managed 3-5 MH/s they're CHEAP cards to run).
my dilemma now, is do i need to sell my rig now and wait for the new gpu and so no mining for two month, until new ccminer come out, or better to keep mining until they come out, but risking to losing some % on my gpu sales?
Keep.
As far as I know, there is no hard deadline for the transition away from PoW. Also takes into account any popups from driver issues that might need to be solved.
The PoW to PoS could happen this time next year or even later. That is a delay to the original plan, which is early next year.
my dilemma now, is do i need to sell my rig now and wait for the new gpu and so no mining for two month, until new ccminer come out, or better to keep mining until they come out, but risking to losing some % on my gpu sales?
Keep.
As far as I know, there is no hard deadline for the transition away from PoW. Also takes into account any popups from driver issues that might need to be solved.
but it seems that the new gpu will have the same 970 price so the price for 970 will be very low after those come out, which mean losing money on each gpu that i sell, and i don't know if the profit of all my six card will match their future loss, when selling them on ebay
Jump to: