Topic: R600 Bitcoin Miner (Warning: Exceedingly impractical) (Read 17068 times)

The community would appreciate if you share your knowledge. Especially when it comes to OpenCL on HD3000 series.

Wow..


I have it compiled for Windows XP x86/x64, Windows Server 2003 x86/x64, Windows Vista x64, Windows 7 x64

If anyone need it I'll supply it for FREE!

Just pm me ; )

p.s.

I've also found a way to enable OpenCL on 38x00 series, if a1 interested - PM

Really old post, but...

I've succeeded in building the R600 Bitcoin Miner on a 32-bit machine. It was kinda painful, as OP has said, but not too bad.

I'm willing to sell the 32-bit build of this app on a bounty for 3 BTC, 2 BTC less than OP's price (barring BTC value increases).

Please note that this miner doesn't have great performance on crappy GPUs, end of story.
(However, if you have a better old AMD ATI GPU, it might be useful...)

If anyone submits an improved Brook+ source file for mining, I'll deduct 0.5 BTC from the cost (up to 1.5 BTC).

I've also created a build system for the miner. I'll release it on GitHub for a bounty of 5 BTC, since it took me a while to get everything working.
Included is a list of all the programs needed, with direct or close-to-direct links to download the programs.

So in summary: 3 BTC for the 32-bit build (-0.5 BTC for every optimization), 5 BTC for the build source!

http://imageshack.us/a/img685/8015/screenshotminer.png

(And yes, that's Windows 8... the Classic Shell and the Windows To Go feature are the only things keeping me here. Note that the build should also work on older OSes, like Windows XP/Vista/7.)

Build system screenshot:
http://imageshack.us/a/img40/7412/screenshotminerbuilder.png

Built with Visual Studio 2010 Pro, Python 2.7.3, Cg 2.0, Boost C++ 1.51, Numpy 1.7.0, and Brook+ 1.4.1 beta on Windows 8 x86

Makes me wish my 3850 was on a 64 bit capable system. As is my dual P3 board leaves me with no other option. Hope the developer comes back.

Yeah no hard feelings Im really hoping that developer of this tool tryis to improve it bit As its always pleasure to test new things.

Yep, I completely admit I screwed up not reading that there was already a version posted here. We both acted kinda douche. All sorted now. No hard feelings I hope.

Also keeping my fingers crossed for an update. I'm sure there's LOTS of tweaks that can be done to improve performance on these cards... I'm still convinced (knowing the technical details/limitations of how CUDA processing works versus AMD's solution being faster) that nVidia miners can be much more optimized as well... I think someone with the motivation and knowledge needs to dig into it. I might even take a crack at it... the only CUDA miner I know of out there is way old (rpcminer-cuda)! The architecture of the hash processing functions just needs to be adapted to match the architecture of those GPUs

I rely on my own results until there is another version (i didnt oversee anything here, i just posted my results). GPU usage is shown in my pic and CPU usage also. You just said that you didnt read before you acted so you didnt know about first post tool being posted and started to act hostile against me. Anyway case closed in my situation until next version comes out for testing.

Shit, I'm hostile? Read your own post, dude, you're going on a world-burning rampage spewing all kinds of hate! I just hadn't realized the OP had already posted a preliminary version (and it would be very helpful if Decade would actually come back and give us some insight here...), so I was wondering why the heck you got a copy of it first! That's all.

And you all keep blindly overlooking the part where the guy said a theoretical speed on a mediocre card would be 20MH/s, which is hell and away from the 1MH/s you were reporting. Seeing as though I didn't know any software had been posted at the time, I had no idea what software you were even using. And at 1MH/s, it seemed more like a mis-configured Phoenix miner than anything (set to run AMD APP emulation on CPU, which happens with a bad DEVICE= entry).

It was a miscommunication, misunderstanding, mis-something.
Nobody's dying.
Nobody's throwing accusations around (except, well, you and the whole "you're pretty hostile dude" and "think before you act" thing, Mom... and PLaci1982 with the "lol m8 8yo n00b" thing).
We're on the same page now. Hopefully. At least in the same chapter. Which is good.
Now, can we MOVE ON?

My sole intention of posting that pic was just proof that i got it work and in what rate. Your own imaginaion ruined everything else. I have not been smartass anywhere in my posts. You just imagine and blame me for things your own brains farted. Still my test is currently only non author result here. So maybe you need to take break and think before you act. BTW it was you asking about cpu usage so i added it too for my pic with gpu info also. Anyway you re pretty hostile dude. Also re-read my posts to figure out i had compiled testing version what i used. You just blamed me things i didnt do (as i had tool and results). My post said "its fun to test new things" and after my own results i said its not good thing to use R620 for mining.

For your words "neither we have this tool"
I did said i used 64 version (you didnt bother check first topic by topic starter, where usually every software is by their author.. always 1st post in topic!). I think all others who read these post realises that But you re too horry to act before you even understand what others said. I assume you re Yankee... as you act like big moron one...

Anywho, I gave the current build a whirl on the 3600 computer. No love at all. It gives me a brief message stating "brook_cal DLL Not Found!", followed by two messages of "Failed to initialize CAL. Falling back to CPU". I'm running from the command line in the extracted ("dist") folder, with Catalyst 11.6 on Win7 x64.

Think I'll go try smacking it with Process Monitor, but I really do hate that thing... useful, but a pain in the ass to use :/

edit: also, I get a kick out of your sig explicitly calling yourself an "expert". I'm not saying you're not - that line in your sig did it for me. Honestly, I don't have to go around waving such self-proclaimed labels in my posts because it's the post itself (specifically, attention to detail in spelling and grammar, goes a LONG way to establishing credibility, like it or not) that shows I know what I'm talking about. Just friendly advice here, and this is completely unrelated to the topic/discussion/argument at hand, but: you really do seem like a bit of a douche putting that in your sig, IMO. 

OMG m8 don't be like a 8yo n00b.... MH/s will be different for different cards... HD 2400, HD 3100-3400, HD 4200 GPUs have ~1/3 of compute power compared to a HD 2600, HD 3600, ~1/6 compared to a HD 2900 GT and ~1/8 compared to a HD 2900 Pro/XT, HD 3800...

It was yours + PLaci1982's replies that had this whole sense of "this is pointless, what are you noobs bothering for" about it, and at the time I hadn't realized there was even anything to test to begin with. Dead serious, I was 100% under the impression nothing had been posted yet and we were paying to have the program written.

Since neither of us had paid for the program to be written yet, obviously I was a bit ruffled that there were people in this thread (and with a huge screenshot) acting like something already "exists and sucks"... so yeah. Sorry 'bout that. Take your 2 BTC away if you like, but I don't even know if Decade is going to be back anyway :/

Where i've been hostile against you? Im not native english speaker so i have to use small sentences. My offer for 2 btc is now out of case cause you being incredibly hostile against me. My results were based on that binary 64 version and i runned several times to see what it can produce. This is same case like in other miner topics, everyone posted max result they got with that version what they had. So my max results were those what i informed. Im not coder so i cant use source. It also seems that coder of this product isnt very active here so this miner thread is pretty mutch forget and move on.

I'l hope you re happy when you haven't even run that app to check what it offers for you and post your results. I atleast runned it several times and show'd my results for all who may check this topic.

You keep saying things to the effect of, "hey dumbass, can't you read?"... and to answer that, yes, I'm not a fucking moron, unlike most of the twats around here, I actually read the posts before I reply. Most of the time. Sometimes I jump in with an "ooh shiney!" effect, but typically I'm the guy slapping everyone straight that didn't read the whole topic.

Case in point... hey dumbass, can't you read?

And for the attention-impaired...

Far fucking cry from the CPU- or nVidia-like 1-point-something hashes a sec.

Additionally, these hashing functions used in kernels like phatk and poclbm seem to be centered around a small handful of custom functions. So to port the mining operation to a new language with a stripped down function set, it should STILL be about as simple as writing those "core" functions (rotate, math, etc) in an optimized way in the new language, and adapting all the function calls of the original code to work with the new language. And before you get started, yes, I DO know what I'm speaking of here (that is, I "program" in several languages, but I'm not a professional "programmer").

Plus, I would REALLY, FUCKING REALLY love to know what you're doing to even be able to write statements like "Max I got out of my HD 3450 was 1.226 mhash"... when Decade - the guy WRITING the first-and-only miner for these older GPUs - hasn't even fucking REPLIED to this thread yet since our offers. So there's no conceivable way (unless I'm getting raped here) that you could have your hands on the software we're talking about paying to develop here...

edit: wate. what the hell? i swear to christ that link wasn't up there in OP before. Now there's a binary and source? I don't see how I could've skimmed past that - only thing I plan on using this on is Win7 x64. Shit. Well, I was under the impression it hadn't even been made usable yet, and I guess it hadn't... with all the optimizations being considered so far, and the potential of >=20MHPS speeds on junker GPUs, I still think it's worth the investment in optimizing!

yeah its already mentioned in op's title  Its still fun to test new things.

..anyway there is no point to use R6xx serie in mining.

Max i got out from my HD 3450 was 1.226 mhash and that was oc core 700mhz stable 48c.

Before you ask, my 3450 is low profile passive model.

That's worse than nVidia mining...

irrelevant info:
..i use this pc as gameserver and it has intel E2140 oc'd to 2.4ghz.
I have tested ufasoft cpu miner and it gives 5.7 mhash @ 73c

Did you read the 1st post?

Brook+ is something deprecated in ATI Stream (now AMD APP) SDK a long time ago. You can consider it as some kind of an OpenCL predecessor. That's was the framework that I used when I got into GPGPU development. It looks like a very very limited C++, rather brain-damaging. Common things like arrays were not allowed in kernels. No local memory, no barriers, limited scatter-gather that was performed into reduction steps and stuff like that, it's like a nightmare from the past. Lucky for me I quickly switched to OpenCL which was something new back then and was also very badly supported. And no, Brook+ is not a heterogenous compute environment, it does not support CPUs. It also has nothing to do with OpenCL.

Actually I doubt recent AMD APP SDKs ship with even brcc. Headers are gone a long time ago. Well, even CAL/IL is being deprecated nowadays.

Wait, wait. I don't think you're mining with your GPU there. What's your CPU usage? What's the miner? If you have AMD-APP installed, it'll emulate GPU-processing using the CPU if you don't select the right device...