Topic: The official MacMiner thread [BTC/LTC-CPU/GPU/FPGA/ASIC] - page 24. (Read 166722 times)
Sounds good - 2010 MacBook Pro, so probably not up to it. Misconception about "lite" coin I guess.
Also, I have been able to use the FPGA/ASIC window to mine BTC and (at the same time) the CGMiner window to scrypt mine LTC. That's nifty, even if it was just to see if I could.
I tried to do this, but CGminer is giving me "GPU 0 Failure, disabling" although I've successfully run CGminer outside of MacMiner on this GPU, albeit not for LTC and non in the FabulousPanda pool. Suggestions? I'm assuming clicking the use scrypt checkbox passes the --scrypt flag to CGMiner. GPU Failure output is always preceded by "Error -54: Enqueueing kernel onto command queue. (clEnqueueNDRangeKernel)", and occurs even if I'm not mining with the Erupter.
scrypt mining is hard on the system, that error indicates your system can't handle the load, maybe try on a negative intensity and see if it still occurs then put it up to see what it can take? What machine are you running on?
Also, I have been able to use the FPGA/ASIC window to mine BTC and (at the same time) the CGMiner window to scrypt mine LTC. That's nifty, even if it was just to see if I could.
I tried to do this, but CGminer is giving me "GPU 0 Failure, disabling" although I've successfully run CGminer outside of MacMiner on this GPU, albeit not for LTC and non in the FabulousPanda pool. Suggestions? I'm assuming clicking the use scrypt checkbox passes the --scrypt flag to CGMiner. GPU Failure output is always preceded by "Error -54: Enqueueing kernel onto command queue. (clEnqueueNDRangeKernel)", and occurs even if I'm not mining with the Erupter.
BitBacco, is there any way to load balance using MacMiner? I tried running two copies once, but they both called to the same instances of the command line engines. Which makes sense.
This isn't a big deal for me yet as I am a small fry, but it's been on my mind as I work on expanding my hashing power and I thought i'd ask.
Also, I have been able to use the FPGA/ASIC window to mine BTC and (at the same time) the CGMiner window to scrypt mine LTC. That's nifty, even if it was just to see if I could.
Lastly, 4.17 and 4.18 have both been rock solid.
This isn't a big deal for me yet as I am a small fry, but it's been on my mind as I work on expanding my hashing power and I thought i'd ask.
Also, I have been able to use the FPGA/ASIC window to mine BTC and (at the same time) the CGMiner window to scrypt mine LTC. That's nifty, even if it was just to see if I could.
Lastly, 4.17 and 4.18 have both been rock solid.
if you add --load-balance in miner options it makes some judgement of which pool to use based on efficiency, but I've heard it has some problems.
I should add the preference to set different config files for each window rather than one for each which should let you do what you want to.
Thanks for the reports, I'm hoping to make the 1.4 branch the old stable version to the forthcoming 1.5 branch!
BitBacco, is there any way to load balance using MacMiner? I tried running two copies once, but they both called to the same instances of the command line engines. Which makes sense.
This isn't a big deal for me yet as I am a small fry, but it's been on my mind as I work on expanding my hashing power and I thought i'd ask.
Also, I have been able to use the FPGA/ASIC window to mine BTC and (at the same time) the CGMiner window to scrypt mine LTC. That's nifty, even if it was just to see if I could.
Lastly, 4.17 and 4.18 have both been rock solid.
This isn't a big deal for me yet as I am a small fry, but it's been on my mind as I work on expanding my hashing power and I thought i'd ask.
Also, I have been able to use the FPGA/ASIC window to mine BTC and (at the same time) the CGMiner window to scrypt mine LTC. That's nifty, even if it was just to see if I could.
Lastly, 4.17 and 4.18 have both been rock solid.
Thanks, that was it! Now I just need to tweak settings to max out the Mhash.
I set -S but not -S all. Will try again!
Cool, that should do it - the next update will include a note in the text field there suggesting -S all!
I set -S but not -S all. Will try again!
Just downloaded latest MacMiner and I'm getting like 1Mhash, supposedly on Block Erupter, but I suspect it's using my GPU though I told it not to. Will try latest stable version instead.
ETA: Still having the issue on last stable version. Suggestions? I did install the silabs driver and it's showing in my dev folder.
Did you set ETA: Still having the issue on last stable version. Suggestions? I did install the silabs driver and it's showing in my dev folder.
-S all
in manual flags in the fpga/asic miner options window? Better to be on the 1.4 branch than the 1.3 branch now.
Just downloaded latest MacMiner and I'm getting like 1Mhash, supposedly on Block Erupter, but I suspect it's using my GPU though I told it not to. Will try latest stable version instead.
ETA: Still having the issue on last stable version. Suggestions? I did install the silabs driver and it's showing in my dev folder.
ETA: Still having the issue on last stable version. Suggestions? I did install the silabs driver and it's showing in my dev folder.
One of the change log items for the just released BFGMiner 3.5.0 says that the Scan for comm devices is handled once now and given to all specified drivers in this version. Don't know if this means that LukeJR reworked the way the scan is done to get around this issue of specific drivers messing each other's all scan up or if it's not related.
It looks as though people are still having issues with -S all on 3.5 and to top it all giving it a shot on Mac OS it comes up with libusb errors - must be a result of the reworking of com devices - I've opened an issue on github - hopefully the next version will be a bit more co-operative!
Yeah, just saw that...skip 3.5.0!!! Looks like it won't connect to BE's at all.
One of the change log items for the just released BFGMiner 3.5.0 says that the Scan for comm devices is handled once now and given to all specified drivers in this version. Don't know if this means that LukeJR reworked the way the scan is done to get around this issue of specific drivers messing each other's all scan up or if it's not related.
It looks as though people are still having issues with -S all on 3.5 and to top it all giving it a shot on Mac OS it comes up with libusb errors - must be a result of the reworking of com devices - I've opened an issue on github - hopefully the next version will be a bit more co-operative!
I know just enough to be dangerous.
In the Windows and Linux-centric discussions about the Blue Fury miners, there are frequent mentions of difficulty running BEs and the BF miners at the same time. There are also frequent complaints about them not performing at their rated hashing levels (the makers have posted screenshots with them working as they should under particular Linux distributions).
I was not able to ascertain the answer to your question, BitBacco, but that doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't there.
In the Windows and Linux-centric discussions about the Blue Fury miners, there are frequent mentions of difficulty running BEs and the BF miners at the same time. There are also frequent complaints about them not performing at their rated hashing levels (the makers have posted screenshots with them working as they should under particular Linux distributions).
I was not able to ascertain the answer to your question, BitBacco, but that doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't there.
The info is a little sparse I guess, it looks as though you may be able to use block erupter usbs and blue furies together but you can then no longer use -S all and you have to specify each device individually which would be a pain for anyone with huge arrays of these things around… If anyone gets the opportunity to find out please let us know how it goes for you!
One of the change log items for the just released BFGMiner 3.5.0 says that the Scan for comm devices is handled once now and given to all specified drivers in this version. Don't know if this means that LukeJR reworked the way the scan is done to get around this issue of specific drivers messing each other's all scan up or if it's not related.
I know just enough to be dangerous.
In the Windows and Linux-centric discussions about the Blue Fury miners, there are frequent mentions of difficulty running BEs and the BF miners at the same time. There are also frequent complaints about them not performing at their rated hashing levels (the makers have posted screenshots with them working as they should under particular Linux distributions).
I was not able to ascertain the answer to your question, BitBacco, but that doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't there.
In the Windows and Linux-centric discussions about the Blue Fury miners, there are frequent mentions of difficulty running BEs and the BF miners at the same time. There are also frequent complaints about them not performing at their rated hashing levels (the makers have posted screenshots with them working as they should under particular Linux distributions).
I was not able to ascertain the answer to your question, BitBacco, but that doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't there.
The info is a little sparse I guess, it looks as though you may be able to use block erupter usbs and blue furies together but you can then no longer use -S all and you have to specify each device individually which would be a pain for anyone with huge arrays of these things around… If anyone gets the opportunity to find out please let us know how it goes for you!
I know just enough to be dangerous.
In the Windows and Linux-centric discussions about the Blue Fury miners, there are frequent mentions of difficulty running BEs and the BF miners at the same time. There are also frequent complaints about them not performing at their rated hashing levels (the makers have posted screenshots with them working as they should under particular Linux distributions).
I was not able to ascertain the answer to your question, BitBacco, but that doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't there.
In the Windows and Linux-centric discussions about the Blue Fury miners, there are frequent mentions of difficulty running BEs and the BF miners at the same time. There are also frequent complaints about them not performing at their rated hashing levels (the makers have posted screenshots with them working as they should under particular Linux distributions).
I was not able to ascertain the answer to your question, BitBacco, but that doesn't necessarily mean it wasn't there.
Has anyone tried running Blue Fury USB miners on their Mac with MacMiner?
I've not heard anyone talk about it but the version of bfgminer included does have bit fury support - I just can't find the info on whether they need usb-serial drivers installed - anyone know that?
Has anyone tried running Blue Fury USB miners on their Mac with MacMiner?
Quote
1.4.18 out now just stops FPGA/ASIC Window from crashing for 10.7 but the table view isn't loading on that OS version and I'm looking in to it
I've been running the new version since yesterday, and no crashes. Thanks
-10.7 crashes-
1.4.18 out now just stops FPGA/ASIC Window from crashing for 10.7 but the table view isn't loading on that OS version and I'm looking in to it
BitBacco, I've been running 1.4.17 for 90 minutes with no problems. Before this update, it manifested after 20-30 minutes, so yay!
Thanks for the fix.
Awesome, thanks for the update!Thanks for the fix.
1.4.17 has just been released and should fix this issue, please let me know!
I am encountering a crash every couple seconds on my 10.7.5 MacMini [in FGPA/ASIC Window]
[/quote]
Ah, thanks for the bug report, it seems the api data retrieval script is crashing every time it's run on 10.7, I'll get that fixed ASAP!
Jump to: