Thx for the new version.
Your thread optimisation guide for the 1mb algo is great for cpu, is it possible to tweak the gpu thread in a similar way to get higher performance on 1mb algos?
Topic: [XMR] JCE Miner Cryptonight/forks, now with GPU! - page 14. (Read 90832 times)
Still no linux 
Online is the 0.33i CPU Windows and Linux, 32 and 64-bits
major release with a big +2% speed on v8, making my miner the best in all cases on CPU, even fees deduced.
The only case where i don't provide best speed is the rare CPUs mining Heavy/Haven with an exact even number of threads and cache (like 4 threads on 16M cache on the Ryzen 1500). In such case it's a tie with xmrig. Otherwise, i get the best speed. On Bittube i'm like +30% faster even on AES CPUs.
And on non-AES, still about +35% faster (assuming someone still use them, i admit i myself has shut down my core2 rigs due to the current low coin prices).
i'd say the last one, 0.33b13
my autoconfig aims for safety, for max perf, use the manual config, the github page provides some examples.
https://github.com/jceminer/cn_gpu_miner
but each card may be different (overclocking, memory...) so take time to tune the values. only three are relevant: multi_hash (a multiple of 16), alpha (64 or 128) and beta (8 or 16).
my autoconfig aims for safety, for max perf, use the manual config, the github page provides some examples.
https://github.com/jceminer/cn_gpu_miner
but each card may be different (overclocking, memory...) so take time to tune the values. only three are relevant: multi_hash (a multiple of 16), alpha (64 or 128) and beta (8 or 16).
Which version do you think is best for 550-560-470-570?
The 0.33i CPU is a major version, the +2% increase is a huge gap for CPU, where we're all close to hardware max.
But this is for v8 only, no gain on other algos.
So of course i'll do a Linux release for it.
TeamRed: this is the best v8 miner for Vega, sure. I congratulated them day one, they did a wonderful job. If you're looking for the best v8 miner for your Vega, the most efficient, so that's TeamRed. Mine is the best for the niche case of older GPU they don't support (older than the Vega and RX). And cpu.
You may still look for the gross performance of my miner where I may be better in some cases, and i happen to be better than xmrig and other reference miners, but looking at the power consumption, TeamRed is the best.
CPU impact: this is expected. Bad, but expected.
The recent 0.33+ and their hybrid, as the name implies, involve more the CPU into helping the GPU than before. Because a CPU is basically an AES asic.
The CPU usage and power consumption is negligible, less than 2%, but it causes a lot of cache invalidation.
When you mine with CPU and GPU in the same JCE instance, each thread knows what the other do and get the CPU at the good time, resulting into a negligible performance impact on the CPU part when the GPUs mine.
But if you use two separate miners, the CPU one being another JCE or another miner, no way to sync and the CPU impact when mining a cache-intensive algo like CN is high. For normal use (Internet surf, gaming...) it's still negligible.
However i did some extra test and observed that, when --legacy is used, the CPU job is now of zero help, and should be skipped. It will make the 33 with --legacy very like the 0.32 on the cpu side. The current --legacy makes it legacy on the GPU side only.
While i was aware of that problem from the beginning, and solved it when dual mining CPU+GPU with the same JCE, i overlooked the case of dual mining with two separate miners. But there's a way to fix, and i'll do it for b14. For people who don't use --legacy, or don't mine with CPU, or mine with CPU using the same JCE instance, there will be no change.
But this is for v8 only, no gain on other algos.
So of course i'll do a Linux release for it.
TeamRed: this is the best v8 miner for Vega, sure. I congratulated them day one, they did a wonderful job. If you're looking for the best v8 miner for your Vega, the most efficient, so that's TeamRed. Mine is the best for the niche case of older GPU they don't support (older than the Vega and RX). And cpu.
You may still look for the gross performance of my miner where I may be better in some cases, and i happen to be better than xmrig and other reference miners, but looking at the power consumption, TeamRed is the best.
CPU impact: this is expected. Bad, but expected.
The recent 0.33+ and their hybrid, as the name implies, involve more the CPU into helping the GPU than before. Because a CPU is basically an AES asic.
The CPU usage and power consumption is negligible, less than 2%, but it causes a lot of cache invalidation.
When you mine with CPU and GPU in the same JCE instance, each thread knows what the other do and get the CPU at the good time, resulting into a negligible performance impact on the CPU part when the GPUs mine.
But if you use two separate miners, the CPU one being another JCE or another miner, no way to sync and the CPU impact when mining a cache-intensive algo like CN is high. For normal use (Internet surf, gaming...) it's still negligible.
However i did some extra test and observed that, when --legacy is used, the CPU job is now of zero help, and should be skipped. It will make the 33 with --legacy very like the 0.32 on the cpu side. The current --legacy makes it legacy on the GPU side only.
While i was aware of that problem from the beginning, and solved it when dual mining CPU+GPU with the same JCE, i overlooked the case of dual mining with two separate miners. But there's a way to fix, and i'll do it for b14. For people who don't use --legacy, or don't mine with CPU, or mine with CPU using the same JCE instance, there will be no change.
The effective hashrate of recent JCE is back to >98%, close to 99% efficiency, as before. And as all current versions of miners so far (xmrig, srb, teamred...).
I'm polishing my fix of the regression on CN-Fast on Vega. Looks like my auto-hybrid introduced in the experimental -x, -y, -z and -sync versions works bad in such case, so i introduced an override --legacy to force the good old non-hybrid mode.
I benched it to be either a little faster or slower than b12 depending on the cards and algo, hard to tell if it was an improvment or not. This way i'll let the user choose.
edit:
@cryptoprofitswitcher: online is the b13, partial release with just the .exe Inside
you may try with undocumented parameter --legacy to check if it restores the speed on your dual Vega.
@other: it contains a very small optim for Vega, and for non-heavy algos, if you want to take a look.
the --legacy may also give a few extra perf, but it's ignored for heavy-class algos, it's just for CN and CN-Light
if it solves the problem, i'll make it a full documented release.
I'm polishing my fix of the regression on CN-Fast on Vega. Looks like my auto-hybrid introduced in the experimental -x, -y, -z and -sync versions works bad in such case, so i introduced an override --legacy to force the good old non-hybrid mode.
I benched it to be either a little faster or slower than b12 depending on the cards and algo, hard to tell if it was an improvment or not. This way i'll let the user choose.
edit:
@cryptoprofitswitcher: online is the b13, partial release with just the .exe Inside
you may try with undocumented parameter --legacy to check if it restores the speed on your dual Vega.
@other: it contains a very small optim for Vega, and for non-heavy algos, if you want to take a look.
the --legacy may also give a few extra perf, but it's ignored for heavy-class algos, it's just for CN and CN-Light
if it solves the problem, i'll make it a full documented release.
Are you sure hybrid is not affecting heavy algos? If i run 32q heavy on my 8 polaris rig, I can run my ryzen 1600 @ ~525H/s (cnv2). If I run any 33 heavy, I can only get ~400H/s on the cpu while GPUs are mining. Given that 33b13 gives me an extra ~100H/s per GPU vs 32q, I'll take the tradeoff if it's necessary, but just checking that something hasn't been overlooked.
EDIT: --legacy doesn't help, but still just want to make sure something hasn't been inadvertently changed.
Have you compared your c8 vs teamred? On Vegas?
I benched other algos, on v8 i'm on par, with equal fees, in a ~1% margin of error, considering xmrig has 1% fees. If you get a well compiled xmrig with 0 fees, so it would be 1% better, on normal CPUs.
On extreme cases (very veak CPU or ultra big multi-xeon/epyc...) i'm better.
On extreme cases (very veak CPU or ultra big multi-xeon/epyc...) i'm better.
No longer, i improved my assembly and i'm now 2% faster than xmrig, so even fees deduced, still faster, but by 0.5%
I also got +1% on old non-aes cpus, where i already provide +30% speed compared to other miners.
release planned tomorrow as the 0.33i
I benched other algos, on v8 i'm on par, with equal fees, in a ~1% margin of error, considering xmrig has 1% fees. If you get a well compiled xmrig with 0 fees, so it would be 1% better, on normal CPUs.
On extreme cases (very veak CPU or ultra big multi-xeon/epyc...) i'm better.
On extreme cases (very veak CPU or ultra big multi-xeon/epyc...) i'm better.
No longer, i improved my assembly and i'm now 2% faster than xmrig, so even fees deduced, still faster, but by 0.5%
I also got +1% on old non-aes cpus, where i already provide +30% speed compared to other miners.
release planned tomorrow as the 0.33i
Did not find it, I just asked them on twitter.
Sure
i'll need a test pool to validate my code, and the testnet one
http://testnet.xtlpool.com/
looks not updated yet. if you know one up to date, please share it.
i'll need a test pool to validate my code, and the testnet one
http://testnet.xtlpool.com/
looks not updated yet. if you know one up to date, please share it.
Thanks for your hard work !
Not yet, my next fork is to be AscendingNight but the devs themselves struggle to provide a working miner. I could skip it but i said i would help them, and so i'll do it. That will be --variation 19.
Ok i take a look at that new stellite fork.
edit: yeah they just updated their reference miner, a fork of stak. I'll add that new fork as --variation 20, even if AscendingNight is not ready before. CPU version will be released first, as always with my miner.
Ok i take a look at that new stellite fork.
edit: yeah they just updated their reference miner, a fork of stak. I'll add that new fork as --variation 20, even if AscendingNight is not ready before. CPU version will be released first, as always with my miner.
JCE, have you checked STELLITE Github ? They've announced an algo change.
Quote
dear developer
I have a problem with version b12
I coin ETNXP coin on fast algorithm
pool rejects balls
I have a problem with version b12
I coin ETNXP coin on fast algorithm
pool rejects balls
OOOOoops, huge regression, i just figured out why.
That's what happens when i dev my way: fast releases, and instant user-dedicated versions, like the ones for Unclwish or cryptoprofitswitcher. I bypass most of the test and happens what must happen: regression on unrelated topics.
I release the fixed b13 instantly and invalidate the b10 to b12.
Thanks a lot for the report, and sorry for the stupid bug.
edit: done
Quote
ryzen 5 1500x
Exactly four physical cores and 16M cache, fits perfectly for Heavy mining on four threads, and no room for the extra threads. In that precise case, xmrig would be very close, with a negligible difference. May your CPU have a little more cores, or less cache, or be older, and my miner would get a clear advantage.Online is the 0.33b13 GPU full release, with:
Quote
b12 bug on old algos fixed
--legacy now documented
and also supported on Heavy algos, if you want to try
--legacy now documented
and also supported on Heavy algos, if you want to try
edit: post mortem
the bug is only on old algos (turtle, mox, masari...), and only on the b12 and the special partial b13, so not that critical, but it was still very unprofessional from me, i apologize. Thanks again for the report.
The Haven is <70c, who mines it with a Core2 any longer?
Alas, here's my result from 0.33h: 50.7 h/s on four cores, Core2 Quad Xeon 2.666G
On stock Ryzen 5 1600:
Any motherboad may apply custom timing tweaks and turbos, here's that's a normal A320 board with default bios settings.
Note the extra 13h/s provided by the four no-cache threads.
Alas, here's my result from 0.33h: 50.7 h/s on four cores, Core2 Quad Xeon 2.666G
On stock Ryzen 5 1600:
Quote
15:30:35 | Hashrate CPU Thread 0: 60.31 h/s
15:30:35 | Hashrate CPU Thread 1: 60.28 h/s
15:30:35 | Hashrate CPU Thread 2: 3.25 h/s
15:30:35 | Hashrate CPU Thread 3: 3.26 h/s
15:30:35 | Hashrate CPU Thread 4: 62.16 h/s
15:30:35 | Hashrate CPU Thread 5: 60.91 h/s
15:30:35 | Hashrate CPU Thread 6: 3.25 h/s
15:30:35 | Hashrate CPU Thread 7: 3.25 h/s
15:30:35 | Total: 256.64 h/s - Max: 257.33 h/s
15:30:40 | CPU Thread 2 finds a Share, value 5000
15:30:42 | Accepted by the pool in 64 ms.
15:30:35 | Hashrate CPU Thread 1: 60.28 h/s
15:30:35 | Hashrate CPU Thread 2: 3.25 h/s
15:30:35 | Hashrate CPU Thread 3: 3.26 h/s
15:30:35 | Hashrate CPU Thread 4: 62.16 h/s
15:30:35 | Hashrate CPU Thread 5: 60.91 h/s
15:30:35 | Hashrate CPU Thread 6: 3.25 h/s
15:30:35 | Hashrate CPU Thread 7: 3.25 h/s
15:30:35 | Total: 256.64 h/s - Max: 257.33 h/s
15:30:40 | CPU Thread 2 finds a Share, value 5000
15:30:42 | Accepted by the pool in 64 ms.
Any motherboad may apply custom timing tweaks and turbos, here's that's a normal A320 board with default bios settings.
Note the extra 13h/s provided by the four no-cache threads.
jce cpu 0.33f
ryzen 5 1500x
config auto :
My 580 card has only few accepted shares. The hashrate is ok, the consumption, the core and memory clock are ordinary. Apparently everything is fine. But the accepted shares is very low.
What can cause this?
What is you Rx580 multihash setting ? and does you use 1 thread or 2 threads in config file ?
{ "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 2, "multi_hash":944 },
{ "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 2, "multi_hash":944 },
But i think the problem isn't here. Everything worked perfekt for months with these values. This error occured only in the last day.
2 hours ago I restarted the rig, since then everything is okay.
I said: this is a strange problem
Try to log and send it here it will be easier for JCE to look over it
@Unclwish : in the config line after Alpha 64 there is Beta 8. Tried Beta 16
unfortunately i haven't log. i disable it :-S
dear developer
I have a problem with version b12
I coin ETNXP coin on fast algorithm
pool rejects balls
with version b 11 problems were not
I bring a log
Detecting OpenCL-capable GPUs...
Found GPU 0, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Pitcairn
Device: 08:00
Compute-Units: 16
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 2048 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Found GPU 1, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Pitcairn
Device: 0a:00
Compute-Units: 16
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 2048 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Found GPU 2, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Baffin
Device: 04:00
Compute-Units: 14
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 2048 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Found GPU 3, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Pitcairn
Device: 0b:00
Compute-Units: 16
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 2048 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Found GPU 4, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Baffin
Device: 01:00
Compute-Units: 14
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 2048 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Found GPU 5, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Tonga
Device: 09:00
Compute-Units: 28
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 2048 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Preparing 8 Mining Threads...
+-- Thread 0 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 0 |
| Multi-hash: 480 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 8 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 1 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 0 |
| Multi-hash: 480 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 8 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 2 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 1 |
| Multi-hash: 480 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 8 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 3 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 1 |
| Multi-hash: 480 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 8 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 4 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 3 |
| Multi-hash: 480 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 8 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 5 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 3 |
| Multi-hash: 480 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 8 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 6 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 5 |
| Multi-hash: 432 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 8 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 7 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 5 |
| Multi-hash: 432 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 8 |
+-------------------------------------------+
Cryptonight Variation: Cryptonight-Fast MSR fork of June-2018
Low intensity.
Starting GPU Thread 0, on GPU 0
Created OpenCL Context for GPU 0 at 000001a3594d8690
Created OpenCL Thread 0 Command-Queue for GPU 0 at 000001a35926f9d0
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 0
Allocating big 960MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 0...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 0...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 0 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 1, on GPU 0
Created OpenCL Thread 1 Command-Queue for GPU 0 at 000001a35926fc70
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 1
Allocating big 960MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 1...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 1...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 1 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 2, on GPU 1
Created OpenCL Context for GPU 1 at 000001a3594d9b30
Created OpenCL Thread 2 Command-Queue for GPU 1 at 000001a35926fb20
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 2
Allocating big 960MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 2...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 2...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 2 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 3, on GPU 1
Created OpenCL Thread 3 Command-Queue for GPU 1 at 000001a3592701b0
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 3
Allocating big 960MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 3...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 3...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 3 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 4, on GPU 3
Created OpenCL Context for GPU 3 at 000001a3594da210
Created OpenCL Thread 4 Command-Queue for GPU 3 at 000001a35926ff10
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 4
Allocating big 960MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 4...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 4...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 4 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 5, on GPU 3
Created OpenCL Thread 5 Command-Queue for GPU 3 at 000001a35926f5e0
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 5
Allocating big 960MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 5...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 5...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 5 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 6, on GPU 5
Created OpenCL Context for GPU 5 at 000001a3594d9710
Created OpenCL Thread 6 Command-Queue for GPU 5 at 000001a35926f730
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 6
Allocating big 864MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 6...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 6...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 6 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 7, on GPU 5
Created OpenCL Thread 7 Command-Queue for GPU 5 at 000001a3645860d0
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 7
Allocating big 864MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 7...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 7...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 7 compiled.
01:01:15 | Cryptonote Mining session starts!
01:01:15 | GPU Compute allocation starts at 80% and reaches 100% after ~1min,
01:01:15 | during this time, the hashrate may be unstable and inconsistent.
01:01:15 | Let the miner warm-up if you're tuning for performance.
01:01:16 | Connecting to mining pool s1.crypto-pool.pro:9015 ...
01:01:16 | Connected to pool. Now logging in...
01:01:16 | Successfuly logged as f4VR74XR616Tw2wAMMfaLV1vmYBSBBbmWXBUtaV8YDb6DHsfKRoYkFaCvhPhsGDDfm1afhzLNuf5XGF mNrvodPoQ6m4q7YYiQc19ErEP7pnub.117000
01:01:16 | Pool changes Difficulty to 117000.
01:01:31 | GPU 5 Thread 6 Lane 219 finds a Share, value 117000
01:01:31 | Accepted by the pool in 63 ms.
01:01:37 | Hashrate GPU Thread 0: 507.81 h/s
01:01:37 | Hashrate GPU Thread 1: 507.81 h/s - Total GPU 0: 1015.61 h/s
01:01:37 | Hashrate GPU Thread 2: 507.81 h/s
01:01:37 | Hashrate GPU Thread 3: 506.97 h/s - Total GPU 1: 1014.77 h/s
01:01:37 | Hashrate GPU Thread 4: 430.72 h/s
01:01:37 | Hashrate GPU Thread 5: 432.63 h/s - Total GPU 3: 863.34 h/s
01:01:37 | Hashrate GPU Thread 6: 501.72 h/s
01:01:37 | Hashrate GPU Thread 7: 497.36 h/s - Total GPU 5: 999.08 h/s
01:01:37 | Total: 3892.79 h/s - Max: 3892.79 h/s
01:01:41 | GPU 0 Thread 0 Lane 5 finds a Share, value 117000
01:01:41 | Rejected by the pool in 62 ms.
01:01:41 | Message from the pool: Rejected share: invalid result
01:01:48 | Hashrate GPU Thread 0: 507.81 h/s
01:01:48 | Hashrate GPU Thread 1: 503.79 h/s - Total GPU 0: 1011.59 h/s
01:01:48 | Hashrate GPU Thread 2: 510.36 h/s
01:01:48 | Hashrate GPU Thread 3: 505.18 h/s - Total GPU 1: 1015.53 h/s
01:01:48 | Hashrate GPU Thread 4: 429.05 h/s
01:01:48 | Hashrate GPU Thread 5: 429.05 h/s - Total GPU 3: 858.10 h/s
01:01:48 | Hashrate GPU Thread 6: 501.72 h/s
01:01:48 | Hashrate GPU Thread 7: 500.49 h/s - Total GPU 5: 1002.21 h/s
01:01:48 | Total: 3887.42 h/s - Max: 3892.79 h/s
01:01:54 | GPU 0: Temp: 34C - Fan: 28% -- Shares: Good: 0 Bad: 1
01:01:54 | GPU 1: Temp: 42C - Fan: 28% -- Shares: Good: 0 Bad: 0
01:01:54 | GPU 3: Temp: 39C - Fan: 28% -- Shares: Good: 0 Bad: 0
01:01:54 | GPU 5: Temp: 44C - Fan: 28% -- Shares: Good: 1 Bad: 0
01:01:55 | GPU 1 Thread 3 Lane 189 finds a Share, value 117000
01:01:55 | Rejected by the pool in 57 ms.
01:01:55 | Message from the pool: Rejected share: invalid result
01:02:12 | GPU 3 Thread 5 Lane 314 finds a Share, value 117000
01:02:12 | Rejected by the pool in 47 ms.
01:02:12 | Message from the pool: Rejected share: invalid result
01:02:14 | GPU 1 Thread 3 Lane 104 finds a Share, value 117000
01:02:14 | Rejected by the pool in 47 ms.
01:02:14 | Message from the pool: Rejected share: invalid result
01:02:16 | GPU 3 Thread 5 Lane 334 finds a Share, value 117000
01:02:16 | Rejected by the pool in 62 ms.
01:02:16 | Message from the pool: Rejected share: invalid result
01:02:18 | Hashrate GPU Thread 0: 507.81 h/s
01:02:18 | Hashrate GPU Thread 1: 508.76 h/s - Total GPU 0: 1016.57 h/s
01:02:18 | Hashrate GPU Thread 2: 506.49 h/s
01:02:18 | Hashrate GPU Thread 3: 508.66 h/s - Total GPU 1: 1015.14 h/s
01:02:18 | Hashrate GPU Thread 4: 430.19 h/s
01:02:18 | Hashrate GPU Thread 5: 429.05 h/s - Total GPU 3: 859.24 h/s
01:02:18 | Hashrate GPU Thread 6: 501.72 h/s
01:02:18 | Hashrate GPU Thread 7: 498.77 h/s - Total GPU 5: 1000.49 h/s
01:02:18 | Total: 3891.42 h/s - Max: 3892.79 h/s
01:02:23 | Hashrate GPU Thread 0: 505.09 h/s
01:02:23 | Hashrate GPU Thread 1: 508.66 h/s - Total GPU 0: 1013.74 h/s
01:02:23 | Hashrate GPU Thread 2: 500.52 h/s
01:02:23 | Hashrate GPU Thread 3: 509.22 h/s - Total GPU 1: 1009.74 h/s
01:02:23 | Hashrate GPU Thread 4: 430.19 h/s
01:02:23 | Hashrate GPU Thread 5: 428.98 h/s - Total GPU 3: 859.16 h/s
01:02:23 | Hashrate GPU Thread 6: 501.72 h/s
01:02:23 | Hashrate GPU Thread 7: 501.72 h/s - Total GPU 5: 1003.43 h/s
01:02:23 | Total: 3886.06 h/s - Max: 3892.79 h/s
01:02:29 | Stop signal received, Quitting...
I use two polaris 460 cards by another miner
what is the problem?
I have a problem with version b12
I coin ETNXP coin on fast algorithm
pool rejects balls
with version b 11 problems were not
I bring a log
Detecting OpenCL-capable GPUs...
Found GPU 0, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Pitcairn
Device: 08:00
Compute-Units: 16
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 2048 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Found GPU 1, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Pitcairn
Device: 0a:00
Compute-Units: 16
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 2048 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Found GPU 2, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Baffin
Device: 04:00
Compute-Units: 14
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 2048 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Found GPU 3, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Pitcairn
Device: 0b:00
Compute-Units: 16
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 2048 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Found GPU 4, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Baffin
Device: 01:00
Compute-Units: 14
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 2048 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Found GPU 5, with:
Vendor: AMD
Processor: Tonga
Device: 09:00
Compute-Units: 28
Cache Memory: 16 KB
Local Memory: 32 KB
Global Memory: 2048 MB
Addressing: 64-bits
Preparing 8 Mining Threads...
+-- Thread 0 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 0 |
| Multi-hash: 480 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 8 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 1 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 0 |
| Multi-hash: 480 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 8 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 2 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 1 |
| Multi-hash: 480 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 8 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 3 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 1 |
| Multi-hash: 480 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 8 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 4 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 3 |
| Multi-hash: 480 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 8 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 5 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 3 |
| Multi-hash: 480 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 8 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 6 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 5 |
| Multi-hash: 432 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 8 |
+-------------------------------------------+
+-- Thread 7 config ------------------------+
| Run on GPU: 5 |
| Multi-hash: 432 |
| Worksize: 8 |
| Factor Alpha 64 |
| Factor Beta 8 |
+-------------------------------------------+
Cryptonight Variation: Cryptonight-Fast MSR fork of June-2018
Low intensity.
Starting GPU Thread 0, on GPU 0
Created OpenCL Context for GPU 0 at 000001a3594d8690
Created OpenCL Thread 0 Command-Queue for GPU 0 at 000001a35926f9d0
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 0
Allocating big 960MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 0...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 0...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 0 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 1, on GPU 0
Created OpenCL Thread 1 Command-Queue for GPU 0 at 000001a35926fc70
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 1
Allocating big 960MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 1...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 1...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 1 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 2, on GPU 1
Created OpenCL Context for GPU 1 at 000001a3594d9b30
Created OpenCL Thread 2 Command-Queue for GPU 1 at 000001a35926fb20
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 2
Allocating big 960MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 2...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 2...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 2 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 3, on GPU 1
Created OpenCL Thread 3 Command-Queue for GPU 1 at 000001a3592701b0
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 3
Allocating big 960MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 3...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 3...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 3 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 4, on GPU 3
Created OpenCL Context for GPU 3 at 000001a3594da210
Created OpenCL Thread 4 Command-Queue for GPU 3 at 000001a35926ff10
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 4
Allocating big 960MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 4...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 4...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 4 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 5, on GPU 3
Created OpenCL Thread 5 Command-Queue for GPU 3 at 000001a35926f5e0
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 5
Allocating big 960MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 5...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 5...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 5 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 6, on GPU 5
Created OpenCL Context for GPU 5 at 000001a3594d9710
Created OpenCL Thread 6 Command-Queue for GPU 5 at 000001a35926f730
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 6
Allocating big 864MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 6...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 6...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 6 compiled.
Starting GPU Thread 7, on GPU 5
Created OpenCL Thread 7 Command-Queue for GPU 5 at 000001a3645860d0
Scratchpad Allocation success for OpenCL Thread 7
Allocating big 864MB scratchpad for OpenCL Thread 7...
Compiling kernels of OpenCL Thread 7...
Kernels of OpenCL Thread 7 compiled.
01:01:15 | Cryptonote Mining session starts!
01:01:15 | GPU Compute allocation starts at 80% and reaches 100% after ~1min,
01:01:15 | during this time, the hashrate may be unstable and inconsistent.
01:01:15 | Let the miner warm-up if you're tuning for performance.
01:01:16 | Connecting to mining pool s1.crypto-pool.pro:9015 ...
01:01:16 | Connected to pool. Now logging in...
01:01:16 | Successfuly logged as f4VR74XR616Tw2wAMMfaLV1vmYBSBBbmWXBUtaV8YDb6DHsfKRoYkFaCvhPhsGDDfm1afhzLNuf5XGF mNrvodPoQ6m4q7YYiQc19ErEP7pnub.117000
01:01:16 | Pool changes Difficulty to 117000.
01:01:31 | GPU 5 Thread 6 Lane 219 finds a Share, value 117000
01:01:31 | Accepted by the pool in 63 ms.
01:01:37 | Hashrate GPU Thread 0: 507.81 h/s
01:01:37 | Hashrate GPU Thread 1: 507.81 h/s - Total GPU 0: 1015.61 h/s
01:01:37 | Hashrate GPU Thread 2: 507.81 h/s
01:01:37 | Hashrate GPU Thread 3: 506.97 h/s - Total GPU 1: 1014.77 h/s
01:01:37 | Hashrate GPU Thread 4: 430.72 h/s
01:01:37 | Hashrate GPU Thread 5: 432.63 h/s - Total GPU 3: 863.34 h/s
01:01:37 | Hashrate GPU Thread 6: 501.72 h/s
01:01:37 | Hashrate GPU Thread 7: 497.36 h/s - Total GPU 5: 999.08 h/s
01:01:37 | Total: 3892.79 h/s - Max: 3892.79 h/s
01:01:41 | GPU 0 Thread 0 Lane 5 finds a Share, value 117000
01:01:41 | Rejected by the pool in 62 ms.
01:01:41 | Message from the pool: Rejected share: invalid result
01:01:48 | Hashrate GPU Thread 0: 507.81 h/s
01:01:48 | Hashrate GPU Thread 1: 503.79 h/s - Total GPU 0: 1011.59 h/s
01:01:48 | Hashrate GPU Thread 2: 510.36 h/s
01:01:48 | Hashrate GPU Thread 3: 505.18 h/s - Total GPU 1: 1015.53 h/s
01:01:48 | Hashrate GPU Thread 4: 429.05 h/s
01:01:48 | Hashrate GPU Thread 5: 429.05 h/s - Total GPU 3: 858.10 h/s
01:01:48 | Hashrate GPU Thread 6: 501.72 h/s
01:01:48 | Hashrate GPU Thread 7: 500.49 h/s - Total GPU 5: 1002.21 h/s
01:01:48 | Total: 3887.42 h/s - Max: 3892.79 h/s
01:01:54 | GPU 0: Temp: 34C - Fan: 28% -- Shares: Good: 0 Bad: 1
01:01:54 | GPU 1: Temp: 42C - Fan: 28% -- Shares: Good: 0 Bad: 0
01:01:54 | GPU 3: Temp: 39C - Fan: 28% -- Shares: Good: 0 Bad: 0
01:01:54 | GPU 5: Temp: 44C - Fan: 28% -- Shares: Good: 1 Bad: 0
01:01:55 | GPU 1 Thread 3 Lane 189 finds a Share, value 117000
01:01:55 | Rejected by the pool in 57 ms.
01:01:55 | Message from the pool: Rejected share: invalid result
01:02:12 | GPU 3 Thread 5 Lane 314 finds a Share, value 117000
01:02:12 | Rejected by the pool in 47 ms.
01:02:12 | Message from the pool: Rejected share: invalid result
01:02:14 | GPU 1 Thread 3 Lane 104 finds a Share, value 117000
01:02:14 | Rejected by the pool in 47 ms.
01:02:14 | Message from the pool: Rejected share: invalid result
01:02:16 | GPU 3 Thread 5 Lane 334 finds a Share, value 117000
01:02:16 | Rejected by the pool in 62 ms.
01:02:16 | Message from the pool: Rejected share: invalid result
01:02:18 | Hashrate GPU Thread 0: 507.81 h/s
01:02:18 | Hashrate GPU Thread 1: 508.76 h/s - Total GPU 0: 1016.57 h/s
01:02:18 | Hashrate GPU Thread 2: 506.49 h/s
01:02:18 | Hashrate GPU Thread 3: 508.66 h/s - Total GPU 1: 1015.14 h/s
01:02:18 | Hashrate GPU Thread 4: 430.19 h/s
01:02:18 | Hashrate GPU Thread 5: 429.05 h/s - Total GPU 3: 859.24 h/s
01:02:18 | Hashrate GPU Thread 6: 501.72 h/s
01:02:18 | Hashrate GPU Thread 7: 498.77 h/s - Total GPU 5: 1000.49 h/s
01:02:18 | Total: 3891.42 h/s - Max: 3892.79 h/s
01:02:23 | Hashrate GPU Thread 0: 505.09 h/s
01:02:23 | Hashrate GPU Thread 1: 508.66 h/s - Total GPU 0: 1013.74 h/s
01:02:23 | Hashrate GPU Thread 2: 500.52 h/s
01:02:23 | Hashrate GPU Thread 3: 509.22 h/s - Total GPU 1: 1009.74 h/s
01:02:23 | Hashrate GPU Thread 4: 430.19 h/s
01:02:23 | Hashrate GPU Thread 5: 428.98 h/s - Total GPU 3: 859.16 h/s
01:02:23 | Hashrate GPU Thread 6: 501.72 h/s
01:02:23 | Hashrate GPU Thread 7: 501.72 h/s - Total GPU 5: 1003.43 h/s
01:02:23 | Total: 3886.06 h/s - Max: 3892.79 h/s
01:02:29 | Stop signal received, Quitting...
I use two polaris 460 cards by another miner
what is the problem?
My 580 card has only few accepted shares. The hashrate is ok, the consumption, the core and memory clock are ordinary. Apparently everything is fine. But the accepted shares is very low.
What can cause this?
What is you Rx580 multihash setting ? and does you use 1 thread or 2 threads in config file ?
{ "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 2, "multi_hash":944 },
{ "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 2, "multi_hash":944 },
But i think the problem isn't here. Everything worked perfekt for months with these values. This error occured only in the last day.
2 hours ago I restarted the rig, since then everything is okay.
I said: this is a strange problem
Try to log and send it here it will be easier for JCE to look over it
@Unclwish : in the config line after Alpha 64 there is Beta 8. Tried Beta 16
I use that config for my RX580 and my hashrate on pool is the same as the miner :
{ "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta" : 4, "index" : 1, "multi_hash":944 },
{ "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta" : 4, "index" : 1, "multi_hash":944 },
i tried beta 16 but got lower hashrate
Beta 16? { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta" : 4, "index" : 1, "multi_hash":944 },
{ "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta" : 4, "index" : 1, "multi_hash":944 },
i tried beta 16 but got lower hashrate
Jump to: