OLD: BFGMiner 3.10.0: modular ASIC+FPGA, GBT+Strtm, RPC, Mac/Lnx/W64, AntU1, DRB - page 126.

tadzio

full member

Activity: 344

Merit: 100

I know drivers subject is coming back all the time but I'm lost between two drivers suggested:

1. http://www.silabs.com/products/mcu/Pages/USBtoUARTBridgeVCPDrivers.aspx
When I install this one I get "Silicon Labs CP210x USB to UART Bridge" under COMs listed and all is working fine in BFG
2. http://www.ftdichip.com/Drivers/VCP.htm
When I install this one I get devices under USB tree and BFG does not recognize my [BES].

How this two relate? Both say virtual COM (USB to COM).

Anyway, recently switched to BFG (from the other one, what was the name...).
GREAT software Luke, Thank You!

Luke-Jr

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1186

Anyone stuck on BFGMiner 2.10 still?
I think it's time to retire it and promote 3.0 to stable...
Please speak up if 3.0 doesn't work at least as well as 2.10 for you.

HellDiverUK

hero member

Activity: 1246

Merit: 501

I got my Blades running with BFGMiner this evening.

Total MHS:   12310
Received:   0000026720
Accepted:   0000025159
Per Minute:   168.64
Efficiency:   094.15%
Up Time:   0d,02h,29m,11s

Total MHS:   12655
Received:   0000032551
Accepted:   0000031491
Per Minute:   173.24
Efficiency:   096.74%
Up Time:   0d,03h,01m,46s

BFG is showing about 0.5% errors. There were a few more at startup, but they settled down. The same BFGMiner is also running 11 Erupters for an average of around 30GH/s.

BFG is running on Ubuntu 13.04 64-bit Desktop, running on a Celeron 847 Intel NUC (4GB RAM, 30GB Kingston SSD, connected to same 100Mb switch as the Blades).

The average BFGMiner is showing is pretty much what Eligius is reporting.

Luke-Jr

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1186

Quote from: Lucko on September 17, 2013, 02:42:18 PM

Luke-Jr can you comment if the difference I see in blade interface it due to proxy not detecting HW error and BFGMiner do? It is hard to say from pool data since difference is not that big...

It's possible. I'm not sure if slush's proxy handles hw errors.

Lucko

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 1000

Luke-Jr can you comment if the difference I see in blade interface it due to proxy not detecting HW error and BFGMiner do? It is hard to say from pool data since difference is not that big...

Luke-Jr

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1186

Quote from: SirMintALot on September 17, 2013, 04:15:44 AM

I found an odd behavior when you use different blockchains and block erupters. I have a merged mining Bitcoin pool set as main pool and a PPCoin pool as a failback pool. When the main pool fails, it switches without problems to the PPCoin pool and keeps on mining. When the main pool comes back to life, it switches back to pool 0 but stops mining. My block erupters are turned off. If I manualy switch back to pool 1 they start working again. If I now manualy switch to pool 0, bfgminer ignores this and keeps mining on pool 1. I have to restart bfgminer to get it working on pool 0 again.
I also tried manualy switching on my GPU rig. Here most of the time switching between the pools is no problem (It only gets very few times stuck at the PPCoin pool), even balancing as pool strategy works without problems. Load balancing doesnt work, it keeps mining on the pool with the highest priority.

Sounds like it's working fine, given the circumstands.
Multiple blockchains at the same time has never been supported.

Lucko

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 1000

Quote from: HellDiverUK on September 17, 2013, 05:59:15 AM

How long are you leaving the Blade after reboot? Mine will take a good 10 minutes to settle in at 13GH.

Using BFGMiner:

Total MHS:   12549
Received:   0000001810
Accepted:   0000001754
Per Minute:   171.12
Efficiency:   096.90%
Up Time:   0d,00h,10m,15s

Using proxy:

Total MHS:   12981
Received:   0000002848
Accepted:   0000002841
Per Minute:   177.19
Efficiency:   099.75%
Up Time:   0d,00h,16m,02s

I forgot a bit but it was about the same at 7 minutes...

But BFGMiner is showing about 4% HW errors. Could that be it? Proxy server is ignoring errors?

EDIT: This is a longer run with BFGMiner

Total MHS:   12262
Received:   0000008896
Accepted:   0000008359
Per Minute:   167.62
Efficiency:   093.96%
Up Time:   0d,00h,49m,52s

EDIT 2: See https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.3181298

HellDiverUK

hero member

Activity: 1246

Merit: 501

Quote from: Lucko on September 17, 2013, 03:33:01 AM

Well I have proxy setup and BFG miner and one as primary server and one as secondary... Ans I can only do switch pools. And I see different hash rate without restart... So I guess there is something else... But will do some resets...

How long are you leaving the Blade after reboot? Mine will take a good 10 minutes to settle in at 13GH.

Also they seem a bit bursty - in Eligius I'll see the rate go down to about 20GH, then it'll suddenly peak over 31GH. It all averages out in the end, of course. Mine are currently running though a single instance stratum_proxy. I'm hoping to get BFG set up on Linux in the next few days and see if it handles things a little better.

SirMintALot

full member

Activity: 140

Merit: 100

In POS we trust

I found an odd behavior when you use different blockchains and block erupters. I have a merged mining Bitcoin pool set as main pool and a PPCoin pool as a failback pool. When the main pool fails, it switches without problems to the PPCoin pool and keeps on mining. When the main pool comes back to life, it switches back to pool 0 but stops mining. My block erupters are turned off. If I manualy switch back to pool 1 they start working again. If I now manualy switch to pool 0, bfgminer ignores this and keeps mining on pool 1. I have to restart bfgminer to get it working on pool 0 again.
I also tried manualy switching on my GPU rig. Here most of the time switching between the pools is no problem (It only gets very few times stuck at the PPCoin pool), even balancing as pool strategy works without problems. Load balancing doesnt work, it keeps mining on the pool with the highest priority.

Lucko

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 1000

Well I have proxy setup and BFG miner and one as primary server and one as secondary... Ans I can only do switch pools. And I see different hash rate without restart... So I guess there is something else... But will do some resets...

Could if be that I run Linux from vmware player?

HellDiverUK

hero member

Activity: 1246

Merit: 501

Just reboot the Blade - mine give shitty hash rates sometimes, a reboot brings them back to ~13GH. Sometimes after a reboot they'll only do 8GH. They're not the most reliable thing in the world...

Lucko

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 1000

Well it works on proxy. And it started working(without doing anything) with BFGminer but with less speed and efficiency according to blade interface...

Luke-Jr

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1186

Quote from: Lucko on September 16, 2013, 06:19:11 PM

Working thanks

EDIT: maybe I spoke too early.

Now I have:

SGW 0: Initializing...

and nothing happens

Blades have finiky (read: broken) network stacks. Maybe try messing with the computer's MTU? :/

Lucko

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 1000

Working thanks

EDIT: maybe I spoke too early.

Now I have:

SGW 0: Initializing...

and nothing happens

Luke-Jr

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1186

Quote from: Lucko on September 16, 2013, 05:54:40 PM

Quote from: Luke-Jr on September 16, 2013, 05:47:48 PM

Quote from: Lucko on September 16, 2013, 05:38:58 PM

Need some help

I installed Linux so I can run Blade. When installing miner I followed this steps

http://jarco.be/install-bfgminer-ubuntu-mint/

The problem is that I got 3.1.4 installed not 3.2.0. What I need to do?

Thanks

You might need to build from source until unit3 gets around to updating the PPA Sad

OK I have no idea what did you told me... Linux is totally new to me. All I would like is to install 3.2.0 with blade support.

Code:

sudo apt-get install build-essential autoconf automake libtool pkg-config libcurl4-gnutls-dev libjansson-dev uthash-dev libncursesw5-dev libudev-dev libusb-1.0-0-dev libmicrohttpd-dev curl
curl http://luke.dashjr.org/programs/bitcoin/files/bfgminer/3.2.0/bfgminer-3.2.0.tbz2 | tar xjvp
cd bfgminer-3.2.0 && ./configure && make

Then when you want to run BFGMiner, go back to this directory and run:

Code:

./bfgminer your-options-here

Lucko

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 1000

Quote from: Luke-Jr on September 16, 2013, 05:47:48 PM

Quote from: Lucko on September 16, 2013, 05:38:58 PM

Need some help

I installed Linux so I can run Blade. When installing miner I followed this steps

http://jarco.be/install-bfgminer-ubuntu-mint/

The problem is that I got 3.1.4 installed not 3.2.0. What I need to do?

Thanks

You might need to build from source until unit3 gets around to updating the PPA Sad

OK I have no idea what did you told me... Linux is totally new to me. All I would like is to install 3.2.0 with blade support.

EDIT:
I followed also this instructions:
cd ~
mkdir bin
git clone https://github.com/luke-jr/bfgminer.git
cd bfgminer
./autogen.sh
make

But I get:
user@ubuntu:~/bfgminer$ ./autogen.sh
Getting submodules...
Running autoreconf -if...
./autogen.sh: 20: ./autogen.sh: autoreconf: not found
user@ubuntu:~/bfgminer$ make
make: *** No targets specified and no makefile found. Stop.

Luke-Jr

legendary

Activity: 2576

Merit: 1186

Quote from: Lucko on September 16, 2013, 05:38:58 PM

Need some help

I installed Linux so I can run Blade. When installing miner I followed this steps

http://jarco.be/install-bfgminer-ubuntu-mint/

The problem is that I got 3.1.4 installed not 3.2.0. What I need to do?

Thanks

You might need to build from source until unit3 gets around to updating the PPA Sad

Lucko

hero member

Activity: 826

Merit: 1000

Need some help

I installed Linux so I can run Blade. When installing miner I followed this steps

http://jarco.be/install-bfgminer-ubuntu-mint/

The problem is that I got 3.1.4 installed not 3.2.0. What I need to do?

Thanks

vulgartrendkill

hero member

Activity: 518

Merit: 500

Quote from: af_newbie on September 16, 2013, 02:46:49 PM

Quote from: vulgartrendkill on September 15, 2013, 11:19:03 PM

Quote from: DrGuns4Hands on September 15, 2013, 10:06:38 PM

Been back and forth testing CGminer and BFGminer. Since I got my BFL Asics I've notice the CGminer builds take about 90-95% cpu usage on my Rpi and BFGminer gets same performance at ~20% CPU usage. The verdict is in BFGminer is much more efficient for my Rpi.

i`ve been back and forth too, trying to get my BE working with CG but they just won`t (maybe due to my inexperience compiling via mingw or something)

BFGminer just works straight away so I`m sticking.

I too was a fan of cgminer for a long time. But today, bfgminer seems to perform better. I have two mini rigs, same Windows 7 x64 OS on both rigs, one rig is running bfgminer 3.1.4 the other cgminer 3.4.3.
I run them for 10+ hours against EMC. Both rigs show 480GH (+-2) at the miner. At the pool, cgminer is consistently showing 30 GH less. When I switch miners, i.e. run cgminer on the machine that run bfgminer and run bfgminer on the machine that was running cgminer, I get the same results at the pool. cgminer worker is always 30GH slower (+- 5GH).

The only variable is the miner software. Unless bad luck consistently follows cgminer worker, there is no other explanation. Either way, cgminer is losing BTC0.13 a day in my case.
Looks like Luke has finally beaten the cgminer team in terms of performance. For slower GPUs, FPGAs and entry level ASICs this difference might not be noticeable. But it is easy to see when running mini rigs.

So yes, bfgminer should be used with ASICs. Leave cgminer to GPUs and FPGAs.
IMHO, of course. (Spare me the religious discussions of using direct USB vs COM)

No religious talk from me. If it works, it works, end of! Could I borrow a mini rig? my 10 block erupter usbs are sweltering under the 113m diff!!! Sad

af_newbie

legendary

Activity: 2702

Merit: 1468

Quote from: vulgartrendkill on September 15, 2013, 11:19:03 PM

Quote from: DrGuns4Hands on September 15, 2013, 10:06:38 PM

Been back and forth testing CGminer and BFGminer. Since I got my BFL Asics I've notice the CGminer builds take about 90-95% cpu usage on my Rpi and BFGminer gets same performance at ~20% CPU usage. The verdict is in BFGminer is much more efficient for my Rpi.

i`ve been back and forth too, trying to get my BE working with CG but they just won`t (maybe due to my inexperience compiling via mingw or something)

BFGminer just works straight away so I`m sticking.

I too was a fan of cgminer for a long time. But today, bfgminer seems to perform better. I have two mini rigs, same Windows 7 x64 OS on both rigs, one rig is running bfgminer 3.1.4 the other cgminer 3.4.3.
I run them for 10+ hours against EMC. Both rigs show 480GH (+-2) at the miner. At the pool, cgminer is consistently showing 30 GH less. When I switch miners, i.e. run cgminer on the machine that run bfgminer and run bfgminer on the machine that was running cgminer, I get the same results at the pool. cgminer worker is always 30GH slower (+- 5GH).

The only variable is the miner software. Unless bad luck consistently follows cgminer worker, there is no other explanation. Either way, cgminer is losing BTC0.13 a day in my case.
Looks like Luke has finally beaten the cgminer team in terms of performance. For slower GPUs, FPGAs and entry level ASICs this difference might not be noticeable. But it is easy to see when running mini rigs.

So yes, bfgminer should be used with ASICs. Leave cgminer to GPUs and FPGAs.
IMHO, of course. (Spare me the religious discussions of using direct USB vs COM)

Topic: OLD: BFGMiner 3.10.0: modular ASIC+FPGA, GBT+Strtm, RPC, Mac/Lnx/W64, AntU1, DRB - page 126. (Read 1193219 times)