Topic: OLD: BFGMiner 3.10.0: modular ASIC+FPGA, GBT+Strtm, RPC, Mac/Lnx/W64, AntU1, DRB - page 23. (Read 1193271 times)

Sure it works, as long as you don't mind rejected blocks.

Why would anyone be opposed to alternative tools? When I moved from BFGminer, it took me a while to retweak my settings to actually mine as well I did with CGminer. While that doesn't mean it was an issue with BFGminer, it simply means I invested the time to give BFGminer a chance, when most wouldn't even consider it. I think you'll agree that you received a lot of feedback on that when you switch to only supporting BFGminer. I don't care about the soap opera on the back end, as far as I'm concerned, both CK and Luke made it clear they didn't want to support Scrypt long ago.

Not having solo mining capabilities is a big issue, which I overlooked for a long time, only because of you and your software. Not overlooking that anymore as there are tools that match my immediate needs. If I had skills that would assist with fixing this issue, I would, but I don't, and I supported you and your tool, and greatly appreciate all your efforts. You are an amazing dev, and have provided an abundance for the community. That however, does not change the fact that our worlds are different in terms of mining, and your inability to see that solo mining is important for many more than a small portion of the community just shows that many people get stuck in their own definition of mining. I used to be ranked 5 on wemineltc, and I've dropped to 15. There are many more big miners in this scene, and that will continue to grow, making solo mining the junk coins as long as people are foolish enough to get behind them a big deal.  

I mine to profit, and if that means I mine the heck out of a stupid coin like Doge, when it was profitable, that brings me more profitability than someone mining a "legit" coin such as bitcoin, I really don't care. It brings me more bitcoins than someone straight mining BTC.

So, you keep saying solo is the only issue, but if I have two apps that are nearly identical, and one has a feature that works and the other doesnt, it's kind of a no-brainer which one I will be using. If BFGminer continues to have development on it related to Scrypt I'm certainly going to be the first to switch back when all other things are equal, but when my 8 month old version of cgminer works better for me, I'm using it.

Again, we're lucky in general that people like CK, Luke and yourself provide us with the tools you give us, but less drama with others that help out the community is also appreciated, there is room for multiple tools and people will decide which they will use that meets their needs.

Ok.  Guess I got lucky, because my notes tell me this worked back when I was trying it:

./bfgminer -S opencl:auto --gpu-fan 100 --auto-gpu --intensity 18,20 --temp-overheat 90 --temp-cutoff 100 --temp-target 80 --scrypt -t 4 -o http://localhost:6332 -O yaccoinrpc:471EQrAidMjGKb8GYk9P2S4wLcbmKWhNkKXNV4g3vi9M

I assure you that there is a bug in solo mining, and it's been confirmed.

How is it better? I completely fail to see how introducing Yet Another Fork that removes support for anything except GPUs and Scrypt in a world of new algorithms and hardware is anything but short-sighted.

Based on your statements, the only issue in BFGMiner is with solo mining Scrypt coins. Unfortunately that is a pretty niche issue compared to total number of users and what most folks are using the software for. It also, unfortunately, takes a lot of time to setup, reproduce and then test to see if there is an improvement or not.

The current issue is specific to solo mining Scrypt coins.

My congrats on the great job bfgminer does at auto-tuning itself.

I just spent a few hours hand tweaking a MSI R9 270X, with core clock of 1030MHz, and  an advertized boost of 1120MHz.

I found I could take the thread-concurrency up to 28160, memclock up to 1625, and engine up to 1170 with a single gpu-thread.  Best I got, was about 367 MHash.  Not great.

Running  "./bfgminer -S opencl:auto --gpu-fan 100 --auto-gpu --intensity 19 --temp-overheat 90 --temp-cutoff 100 --temp-target 80 --scrypt" with no config file yields 460 MHash.

Digging around, it was using a thread-concurrency of 14114, with one gpu-thread, ran the memclock up to 1625, but set the core clock to 1080 (50 hz over base).  Manually taking it to 1170 (8.3% higher) yielded an additional 7 MHash (1.5%).

What I don't understand is why running at half the max thread-concurrency is faster than running at or near the max the card can handle???

Thoughts?

Cassey

You can solo mine with bfgminer... I've done it.  In fact, I think its discussed back around page 122 or so, but see the Bfgminer README (from github), down around line 523... ah heck, here it is:

SOLO MINING

BFGMiner supports solo mining with any GBT-compatible bitcoin node (such as
bitcoind). To use this mode, you need to specify the URL of your bitcoind node
using the usual pool options (--url, --userpass, etc), and the --coinbase-addr
option to specify the Bitcoin address you wish to receive the block rewards
mined. If you are solo mining with more than one instance of BFGMiner (or any
other software) per payout address, you must also specify data using the
--coinbase-sig option to ensure each miner is working on unique work. Note
that this data will be publicly seen if your miner finds a block using any
GBT-enabled pool, even when not solo mining (such as failover). If your
bitcoin node does not support longpolling (for example, bitcoind 0.8.x), you
should consider setting up a failover pool to provide you with block
notifications. Note that solo mining does not use shares, so BFGMiner's adjusted
hashrate (third column) may suddenly drop to zero if a block you submit is
rejected; this does not indicate that it has stopped mining.

Example solo mining usage:

bfgminer -o http://localhost:8332 -u username -p password \
    --coinbase-addr 1QATWksNFGeUJCWBrN4g6hGM178Lovm7Wh \
    --coinbase-sig "rig1: This is Joe's block!"

+1, I have not yet tried out SGminer, but early versions of cgminer are what I still use when I want to do things such as solo mine Scrypt alts. I gave it a shot with BFGminer for Scrypt mining and had it running fairly well after some initial issues, but since I have a large farm, and need the capability to solo mine for profitability of newer "crap coins", I can't do that without issue with BFG yet.

I don't understand the "rift" between SGminer and BFGminer though, I don't know why there always needs to be drama on any similar products. Human nature? I don't think Apple is going to join Google because they provide similar services, so how about we live and let live?

Much of the confusion over supporting BFGminer has always come from Luke's past comments on all Scrypt coins, and while they may have been retracted and there is a larger development team now committed to that area, it doesn't change the statements. CK said similar things, and then dropped support. I'd venture to say that the Scrypt community needs someone committed to that area to lead up a project, and while many here say they should just join and contribute here, I'm not fully convinced that a new project isn't a better thing for the community.

I'm also a believe in completely separate miners for each protocol, however ASICs with mixed mining have made that unlikely.

Just sent you a PM.  Thanks!!!

sgminer's changes, as far as I can see, are shit.  I'm using either bfgminer 3.10.0 or cgminer 3.7.2 for my scrypt mining - those two miners actually work.  sgminer doesn't work at all well.  I think they're adding 24" chrome spinner rims to an AMC Gremlin.  

I use a mix of HD6xxx, HD7xxx, and R9 GPUs on Windows 7.

Do you have time to be scientific? If so:

What hardware are you using?
What arguments are you launching BFGMiner with?
What arguments are you launching SGMiner with?
Can you run each for 15 minutes, then hit Q, and then Copy & Paste the summary here?

I was wrong. I confused CGMiner and BFGMiner. I am sorry.  I apologize especially to Luke Jr. who I have nothing but admiration and respect for.


Just to prove myself wrong I ran the current version, which I use with my ASICs, on my GPU with the appropiate changes in switches, and it worked. I will probably stay with SGMiner for Scrypt though.  What was hashing with a passion on Scrypt was not so productive on BGMiner, apparently.  Not very scientific, I just looked at accepted per minute.

I'm learning C in doing this - I code in Objective-C and C# which aren't far off but there is a lot of learning going on here. Luke is great with code reviews and I've learned a lot just by doing these drivers and some bug fixes for OS X.

I'd start by getting the source code setup so you can debug it and step through it. I use NetBeans on Windows for that and Xcode on OS X as I like IDEs. I can help with that setup if you want.

Beyond that reference this file for how the drivers in BFGMiner work internally:

https://github.com/luke-jr/bfgminer/blob/bfgminer/HACKING

Definitely glad to have such awesome support personnel for this wonderful program!  Wish I could contribute, but I'd have to delve back into my C++ books and take a look at all the different parts of the code to do some reverse engineering.  If there's anything I can do to contribute, or if there's a white paper available on how BFG Miner works I'd love to read it.

Count me among the confused. I have suggested and requested that they merge their changes back upstream to BFGMiner and gotten nowhere with them. It's very unfortunate as I think that continuing to fork-and-change these miners makes it much harder for the community to support them with higher-level tools (like MultiMiner).

BFGMiner is not dropping Scrypt support. In fact version 3.10 included fixes (by Luke) for R9 class hardware that the SGMiner folks then cherry-picked into their own code.

Additionally, version 4.0 of BFGMiner is slated to have a bunch of Scrypt related improvements including support for higher intensities, shader-based intensities, better support for cards with different GPU-thread settings, and support for Scrypt ASICs.

On top of that we are actively in discussion with other dev teams on merging in new algorithms such as Keccak.

If anything BFGMiner has never been more committed to supporting more types of hardware and algorithms.

Perhaps this opening line from README.scrypt is confusing?  It is simply crediting Kolivas as the original writer of scrypt support and giving a donation address.  SGminer is a fork of cgminer, and cgminer has discontinued scrypt support, but bfgminer still has it and it will be carried as long as people want support.  I am just as confused as Luke-Jr on why the SGMiner crew wouldn't want to collaborate to improve scrypt support in bfgminer (if it possible).

Since my own card doesn't seem to like scrypt, I haven't been able to properly compare SGminer and bfgminer's scrypt support from a usability standpoint. :/

I see nothing of this sort.

I don't know why the sgminer folks aren't interested in collaboration; you'd have to ask them.

Which readme?  I'm looking at the 3.10.0 bfgminer ones and not finding what your referencing...

I got it from his read me file.