With the default build (Linux x86_64)
Desktop (Xeon x3350 @ 3.2Ghz, 4GB RAM):
4 cores - ~ 3300 khash/s
Laptop (ASUS w/ Core2 Quad Q9000 @ 2GHz):
4 cores - ~ 2000 khash/s
Topic: Post Your Hash/Sec and Hardware - page 3. (Read 39000 times)
Thanks, Xunie. The host isn't secure, for many reasons (MS knows me well, basically). The VM is running encrypted filesystem, and connects via private VPN.
I'm also playing with Ubuntu 10.04 Server on old gaming machine. I just need to figure out command line access, because there's no GUI.
I'm also playing with Ubuntu 10.04 Server on old gaming machine. I just need to figure out command line access, because there's no GUI.
Hello, all 
I'm new to Bitcoin. I'm running client on Ubuntu 10.04 x86 VM with two CPUs and 2.5GB memory. The VM's running in Hyper-V on Windows Server 2008 x64, on old Dell SC1435 with Quad-Core AMD Operon 2376 and 8BG memory.
It's been up for two days, has 15 connections, and currently sees 65,564 blocks. This morning, it generated "50", and tells me that they'll mature in 9 more blocks. That seems more-or-less normal, yes?
What's odd is that it's running at 300-500 khash/s when otherwise idle, but is using only about 1% host CPU on average, with occasional bursts to 10%-20%. The bursts seem to correlate with disk and network activity, which makes sense.
Anyway, I'm curious why I'm not seeing higher khash/s, given that there's plenty of resources available.
Could it be because the VM is running without Linux integration services (which I haven't managed to install successfully)? Or could it be because I'm not port forwarding? And FWIW, I can't do that because I'm connecting through OpenVPN.
How can I increase resource utilization? Alternatively, I'm sure that Ubuntu would be happy with one CPU and 1GB memory. Would running four such VMs be workable?
Thank you. This is fun.
I'm new to Bitcoin. I'm running client on Ubuntu 10.04 x86 VM with two CPUs and 2.5GB memory. The VM's running in Hyper-V on Windows Server 2008 x64, on old Dell SC1435 with Quad-Core AMD Operon 2376 and 8BG memory.It's been up for two days, has 15 connections, and currently sees 65,564 blocks. This morning, it generated "50", and tells me that they'll mature in 9 more blocks. That seems more-or-less normal, yes?
What's odd is that it's running at 300-500 khash/s when otherwise idle, but is using only about 1% host CPU on average, with occasional bursts to 10%-20%. The bursts seem to correlate with disk and network activity, which makes sense.
Anyway, I'm curious why I'm not seeing higher khash/s, given that there's plenty of resources available.
Could it be because the VM is running without Linux integration services (which I haven't managed to install successfully)? Or could it be because I'm not port forwarding? And FWIW, I can't do that because I'm connecting through OpenVPN.
How can I increase resource utilization? Alternatively, I'm sure that Ubuntu would be happy with one CPU and 1GB memory. Would running four such VMs be workable?
Thank you. This is fun.
Well, running Bitcoin in an VM slows it down, significantly.
It's better to run it directly on the host operating system.
I suggest you do that.
Hello, all I'm new to Bitcoin. I'm running client on Ubuntu 10.04 x86 VM with two CPUs and 2.5GB memory. The VM's running in Hyper-V on Windows Server 2008 x64, on old Dell SC1435 with Quad-Core AMD Operon 2376 and 8BG memory.
It's been up for two days, has 15 connections, and currently sees 65,564 blocks. This morning, it generated "50", and tells me that they'll mature in 9 more blocks. That seems more-or-less normal, yes?
What's odd is that it's running at 300-500 khash/s when otherwise idle, but is using only about 1% host CPU on average, with occasional bursts to 10%-20%. The bursts seem to correlate with disk and network activity, which makes sense.
Anyway, I'm curious why I'm not seeing higher khash/s, given that there's plenty of resources available.
Could it be because the VM is running without Linux integration services (which I haven't managed to install successfully)? Or could it be because I'm not port forwarding? And FWIW, I can't do that because I'm connecting through OpenVPN.
How can I increase resource utilization? Alternatively, I'm sure that Ubuntu would be happy with one CPU and 1GB memory. Would running four such VMs be workable?
Thank you. This is fun.
I'm new to Bitcoin. I'm running client on Ubuntu 10.04 x86 VM with two CPUs and 2.5GB memory. The VM's running in Hyper-V on Windows Server 2008 x64, on old Dell SC1435 with Quad-Core AMD Operon 2376 and 8BG memory.It's been up for two days, has 15 connections, and currently sees 65,564 blocks. This morning, it generated "50", and tells me that they'll mature in 9 more blocks. That seems more-or-less normal, yes?
What's odd is that it's running at 300-500 khash/s when otherwise idle, but is using only about 1% host CPU on average, with occasional bursts to 10%-20%. The bursts seem to correlate with disk and network activity, which makes sense.
Anyway, I'm curious why I'm not seeing higher khash/s, given that there's plenty of resources available.
Could it be because the VM is running without Linux integration services (which I haven't managed to install successfully)? Or could it be because I'm not port forwarding? And FWIW, I can't do that because I'm connecting through OpenVPN.
How can I increase resource utilization? Alternatively, I'm sure that Ubuntu would be happy with one CPU and 1GB memory. Would running four such VMs be workable?
Thank you. This is fun.
Heh. I'm using a HP Pavilion 8670c with 384MB RAM and a 600MHz Pentium III. I'm only getting 50 khash per second.
AMD-64 X2 TK-53 1.7Ghz
1 Core: 310 khash/sec
2 Cores: 590 khash/sec (and an overheating laptop)
1 Core: 310 khash/sec
2 Cores: 590 khash/sec (and an overheating laptop)
Intel Core i5-450M (2.4Ghz)
4GBs RAM
*One Core => 350-450 khash/sec
*Two Cores => 600-850 khash/sec
*Three Cores => 750 - 900khash/sec
*Four Cores => 800-900 khash/sec
Using the regular build, 0.3 on Win7/64bit
4GBs RAM
*One Core => 350-450 khash/sec
*Two Cores => 600-850 khash/sec
*Three Cores => 750 - 900khash/sec
*Four Cores => 800-900 khash/sec
Using the regular build, 0.3 on Win7/64bit
Really sorry about this but there was a typo in the patch.. I replaced the original version with a fixed one. The original patch was actually not incrementing the nonce so it messed up the generation 
new patch: http://heliacal.net/~solar/bitcoin/bitcoin-svn-79-perfcounter-2010-06-02.patch
Laszlo and I talked about this on IRC. I made a slightly cleaned up version against r80 of the SVN (no differences, but it might be a hair faster). You can get it here:new patch: http://heliacal.net/~solar/bitcoin/bitcoin-svn-79-perfcounter-2010-06-02.patch
http://www.alloscomp.com/bitcoin/bitcoin-svn-80-perfcounter-cleaned-2010-06-07.patch
Or you can just get the combined patch that also includes the net.h workaround and some RPC extensions:
http://www.alloscomp.com/bitcoin/bitcoin-svn-80-combined-2010-06-07.patch
Really sorry about this but there was a typo in the patch.. I replaced the original version with a fixed one. The original patch was actually not incrementing the nonce so it messed up the generation
new patch: http://heliacal.net/~solar/bitcoin/bitcoin-svn-79-perfcounter-2010-06-02.patch
new patch: http://heliacal.net/~solar/bitcoin/bitcoin-svn-79-perfcounter-2010-06-02.patch
Sure. My computers ran all last night without generating again.
http://validity.alloscomp.com/bitcoin/vps.debug.log.bz2 (2.1MiB compressed)
http://validity.alloscomp.com/bitcoin/laptop.debug.log.gz (489KiB compressed)
Thanks.
http://validity.alloscomp.com/bitcoin/vps.debug.log.bz2 (2.1MiB compressed)
http://validity.alloscomp.com/bitcoin/laptop.debug.log.gz (489KiB compressed)
Thanks.
Can you post it on a web server or something? It sounds pretty large. I could take a look but it's probably hard to find anything among all the spam.
I'm on campus internet. It's pretty reliable. It occasionally asks me to reauthenticate with the master server, but that's fairly rare. The VPS is el-cheepo, but it never drops for more than a second or two. Would it help for me to post or link my debug.log?
The debug.log is truncated when you restart the app, not sure if it does it periodically too.. are you perhaps getting disconnected/reconnected frequently or having really high latency? A poor connection could prevent you from generating, though I wouldn't think you would be having that issue at the VPS.
Athlon FX-55 (socket 939) on linux
**Perf - thread 1 : 575k iter/sec
**Perf - total : 575k iter/sec (1 threads)
**Perf - thread 1 : 575k iter/sec
**Perf - total : 575k iter/sec (1 threads)
That seems odd.. are you seeing any instances of 'proof-of-work' if you grep debug.log?
No, I'm not seeing that on either. On my workstation, the debug.log file has for some reason been clipped at the beginning. It's around 4.8 MiB. On my VPS, it's 20MiB and going strong.
That seems odd.. are you seeing any instances of 'proof-of-work' if you grep debug.log?
I haven't generated a block since 6/3/2010 while running my VPS (up to 2280 khps) 24/7 and my laptop (1200 khps) every night. I'm rather disappointed.
You should compile for 32 bit windows (mingw).. 64 bit would just make it use more memory but you'll have to build all the dependencies that way too, if it's even possible with wxWidgets and stuff..
Win7 64-Bit here.
Make sure you guys try compiling with -O2 instead of -O0 (check your makefiles). It improved performance a lot for me.
Laszio, I tried that but it failed. I'll see if I can't address the specific error. Line 15 in net.h failed to compile.Quote from: SmokeTooMuch
someone make a windows binary for noobs/lazy people like me ^^
I can try if nobody else replies and this doesn't get accepted into mainline. Not sure what the Windows dependencies are or if I can cross-compile. Win64 or 32? Jump to: