Why does phatk suck for my 6990? | Bitcointalksearch.org

DrHaribo

legendary

Activity: 2730

Merit: 1034

Needs more jiggawatts

Quote from: BOARBEAR on July 27, 2011, 03:24:32 AM

Quote from: DrHaribo on July 26, 2011, 06:51:05 AM

If you don't mind mining at the BitMinter pool (and get 5% extra pay while promotion lasts), you could try the BitMinter miner. It's the fastest miner on 6990 right now.

If you try this miner and do a speed comparison, especially on multi-GPU systems, hit the little button in the lower right for performance mode. Otherwise all the screen updates can cause a noticable performance hit.

is it faster for 5870?

You can try it and see.

I think DiabloMiner and modified-Phoenix with modified-phatk (from another thread in the forums) are still a little faster on those cards. I'll have to close that gap when I have more time.

BOARBEAR

member

Activity: 77

Merit: 10

Quote from: DrHaribo on July 26, 2011, 06:51:05 AM

If you don't mind mining at the BitMinter pool (and get 5% extra pay while promotion lasts), you could try the BitMinter miner. It's the fastest miner on 6990 right now.

If you try this miner and do a speed comparison, especially on multi-GPU systems, hit the little button in the lower right for performance mode. Otherwise all the screen updates can cause a noticable performance hit.

is it faster for 5870?

amazingrando

hero member

Activity: 546

Merit: 500

Quote from: MiningBuddy on July 26, 2011, 04:52:02 PM

Quote from: amazingrando on July 26, 2011, 04:44:25 PM

Phatk was lower on my 6950's for some reason too.

BTW, if you have 6XXX series, the work size should be 256. You'll get a slight boost. Use 128 on 5XXX series cards

Cheers

Actually I find 128 better on my 6990 and 256 better on my 5870. Roll Eyes

Interesting. I get about 2 Mh/s better with the 256. I might give it another try.

m3ta

sr. member

Activity: 435

Merit: 250

Quote from: MiningBuddy on July 26, 2011, 04:52:02 PM

Quote from: amazingrando on July 26, 2011, 04:44:25 PM

Phatk was lower on my 6950's for some reason too.

BTW, if you have 6XXX series, the work size should be 256. You'll get a slight boost. Use 128 on 5XXX series cards

Cheers

Actually I find 128 better on my 6990 and 256 better on my 5870. Roll Eyes

[/quote

My 6970 with 128 gives +7Mh/s than with 256.

MiningBuddy

hero member

Activity: 927

Merit: 1000

฿itcoin ฿itcoin ฿itcoin

Quote from: amazingrando on July 26, 2011, 04:44:25 PM

Phatk was lower on my 6950's for some reason too.

BTW, if you have 6XXX series, the work size should be 256. You'll get a slight boost. Use 128 on 5XXX series cards

Cheers

Actually I find 128 better on my 6990 and 256 better on my 5870. Roll Eyes

amazingrando

hero member

Activity: 546

Merit: 500

Phatk was lower on my 6950's for some reason too.

BTW, if you have 6XXX series, the work size should be 256. You'll get a slight boost. Use 128 on 5XXX series cards

Cheers

Saturn7

full member

Activity: 147

Merit: 100

i'm pretty sure the WORKSIZE is suppose to be 128 not 192 for 6 series cards.

Dargo

legendary

Activity: 1820

Merit: 1000

I've had better luck with phoenix/phatk, but I've also found that it is more tricky to tune. BTW, if both those GPUs have been running for the same length of time and on the same settings, notice that the one hashing at the lower rate has actually submitted more shares. IMO, you have to fine tune your cards for submission rate rather than MHps, because after a certain point, higher hash rate doesn't necessarily correlate with a higher share submission rate. But you get paid for your share submission rate, not your hash rate.

error

hero member

Activity: 588

Merit: 500

GPU 0 is also busy drawing your Windows display. This cuts off some MHash/sec.

If you want a fair and accurate comparison, test your miners on GPU 1 only.

To speed up GPU 0 some more, turn off Windows Aero completely.

Desolator

sr. member

Activity: 392

Merit: 250

it seems to me like phatk on phoenix is what everyone with the best scores on the mining hardware comparison wiki page use but that doesn't mean a thing. I tried many, many configurations and got within about 5 MH/s but POCLBM was still faster. Maybe it works better on some cards but it would appear that for my 5830, everyone on the wiki with higher OCing speeds than me are basically using the wrong kernel and that's all there is to it Tongue

DrHaribo

legendary

Activity: 2730

Merit: 1034

Needs more jiggawatts

Quote from: ruski on July 26, 2011, 07:12:51 AM

@BitMinter no thanks I don't feel like having my wallet stolen today.

I don't know where you get this idea from, but my software doesn't steal wallets.

You may want to try a miner that can run several GPUs from the same miner instance, though. I have noticed sometimes if I have several OpenCL programs running it can affect performance, even if only one of them is actively using the GPU.

If you think my miner is "the devil", then I'd recommend trying DiabloMiner. That's the real devil Grin

But seriously, that's another miner that can run multiple GPUs from the same miner instance, and perhaps help avoid the problems you are experiencing.

talldude

member

Activity: 224

Merit: 10

add a fastloop=false and worksize=192 to the phoenix to see if it makes a difference.

And don't complain - go with the one that's fastest. If poclbm is better, just use that then.

ruski

full member

Activity: 350

Merit: 100

Quote from: dikidera on July 26, 2011, 06:55:41 AM

Why is it that i am seeing that the faster miner i.e 446 mhash/s has waay less shares than the slower miner?

I've been experimenting with poclbm flags with #1, it's been on and off all day.

@BitMinter no thanks I don't feel like having my wallet stolen today.

@xcooling That's what I'm trying to do. So far poclbm is the best.

dikidera

full member

Activity: 126

Merit: 100

Why is it that i am seeing that the faster miner i.e 446 mhash/s has waay less shares than the slower miner?

DrHaribo

legendary

Activity: 2730

Merit: 1034

Needs more jiggawatts

If you don't mind mining at the BitMinter pool (and get 5% extra pay while promotion lasts), you could try the BitMinter miner. It's the fastest miner on 6990 right now.

If you try this miner and do a speed comparison, especially on multi-GPU systems, hit the little button in the lower right for performance mode. Otherwise all the screen updates can cause a noticable performance hit.

xcooling

member

Activity: 145

Merit: 10

try a better program.

ruski

full member

Activity: 350

Merit: 100

What you see before you is as follows:

GPU 0: phoenix.exe -u http://|||||||||||||||||||@pit.deepbit.net:8332 PLATFORM=0 DEVICE=0 -k phatk BFI_INT VECTORS AGGRESSION=12

GPU 1: poclbm.exe --user=||||||||||| --pass=||||| -o pit.deepbit.net -p 8332 --device=1 --platform=0 --verbose -v --worksize=192 --frames=1 -a3 -a 3

Both GPU cores OC to 965 MHz.

I'm using the optimised phatk kernel, that supposedly drops another 10 MH/s on top. Poclbm is killing it. What am I doing wrong?

Edit - Both cores at 99% and 77°C.

Topic: Why does phatk suck for my 6990? (Read 2349 times)