Pages:
Author

Topic: [XMR] JCE Miner Cryptonight/forks, now with GPU! - page 31. (Read 90841 times)

jr. member
Activity: 55
Merit: 5

Three config arrays for three algo class (Light, normal, Heavy)

Quote
multiple algos on config.txt
That's exactly how it works. Example from the doc:
Code:
/* This is the configuration when Cryptolight class algo is mined */
"cryptolight_cpu_threads_conf" :
[
     { "cpu_architecture" : "auto", "affine_to_cpu" : 0, "use_cache" : true, "multi_hash":1 },
     { "cpu_architecture" : "auto", "affine_to_cpu" : 1, "use_cache" : true, "multi_hash":1 },
     { "cpu_architecture" : "auto", "affine_to_cpu" : 2, "use_cache" : true, "multi_hash":1 },
     { "cpu_architecture" : "auto", "affine_to_cpu" : 3, "use_cache" : true, "multi_hash":1 },
],

/* This is the configuration when Cryptonight class algo is mined */
"cryptonight_cpu_threads_conf" :
[
     { "cpu_architecture" : "auto", "affine_to_cpu" : 0, "use_cache" : true, "multi_hash":1 },
     { "cpu_architecture" : "auto", "affine_to_cpu" : 2, "use_cache" : true, "multi_hash":1 },
],

/* This is the configuration when CN-Heavy class algo is mined */
"cn_heavy_cpu_threads_conf" :
[
     { "cpu_architecture" : "auto", "affine_to_cpu" : 0, "use_cache" : true, "multi_hash":1 },
],

Well, I've had some spare time today and I'm testing this again.
Seems like the information you gave me is only valid for CPU mining. I'm using GPU mining and there is no information on the wiki
The wiki tells me to use --variation 16 for moneroocean, but it's an invalid value for the GPU miner so I just omit the value, and _cpu_threads_conf is not meant to be used on a gpu mining rig so I'm using --auto
Couldn't you just merge both versions in a gpu+cpu mining with the same features and maintain only one miner? Because the gpu miner also does cpu mining, but the wiki is missing information. Also you have so many .bat files and .txt, just keep it simple and put examples and all documentation inside the readme.txt for a clean and easy way to upgrade and access the documentation.
I've also experienced some bugs: For example, on the gpu miner, there's no information on how to use the gpu temperature monitoring. It always reports 0ºC (driver 18.6.1, windows 10 ltsb, no display connected to amd gpus). For some reason, --auto only runs on 4 of my 5 gpus, one is idle unless I configure it on config.txt (I have 5 RX580 4GB and 1 IGP, i've set -g 1,2,3,4,5 and it mines on 1,2,3,4)
Don't get me wrong, I've tested many miners and I would like to start using yours, but it needs some improvements before I can join. I'll keep on checking the changelogs
member
Activity: 350
Merit: 22
online is

0.33f CPU Windows

Quote
* Cryptolight-Dark algo, --variation 17
* Parameterless config

The parameterless config, to run JCE like a service, will look, when no param is given, to a file named serviceconfig.txt
If it exists and contains parameters (in a JSON style) the miner will apply those params and start.
Example:

Code:
/* This is an example of implicit parameters 
   They are applied if and only if:
   * The miner is started with no parameter
   * And a file named exactly serviceconfig.txt is in the miner current directory
   * And it contains JSON-like parameters as comma-separated quoted strings
*/

// Usual parameters
"--auto", "--any", "--forever", "--keepalive", "--low",

// Using automatic fork selection, note that numbers don't need to be quoted
"--variation", 0,

// Example pool for Monero
"-o", "pool.monero.hashvault.pro:3333",

// Example wallet (that's the donation XMR wallet)
"-u", "43En6FLUc9EQPFjP21B73gLHBMPvUBV9LQxNA8ARsm7fLsMbybWeZgY6Dy1k77un6Z9BF8r7yxS6yTGCGdQhofYL6AvxwxZ",

// Password, no matter
"-p", "x"
jr. member
Activity: 103
Merit: 2
Unfortunately, I could not get a result more than SRB 1003 h/s (rx470  1165/2100 timing mod bios,  880mV)  
SRB
JCE mode --auto max 970 h/s
JCE manual config (checked all variants options above) give less than 970
as sample,  multi_hash ": 992  = give me  740 h/s
I wanted at least 1100  h/s  Huh
newbie
Activity: 7
Merit: 0

I read here opposite results, so:
* Ensure you're talking about CN-Heavy and related, CN-v8 is not concerned by the 0.33b6 release
* Is it unstable on the 8Gb RX and Vega only? Sure that's the most common cards, but if this is the status, it's an important detail to track the bug down. I did my long-run tests on 2G and 4G cards only so far. If I need a 8G card to reproduce the bug, i've some, so i need to focus on them.

Sorry you are right - I haven't specified the algo - CN-heavy

580/8GB, 1250/2000

     { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 0, "multi_hash":992 },
     { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 0, "multi_hash":992 },

032q - stable 1165h/s

033b6 - unstable 1000-1220h/s (varies) and the total hash for the rig - lower that stable 1165 with older version for all cards.

Same situation is on vega56.

Lowering milti_hash, only decrease the hasrate, the fluctuations remain. 4GB no problem.


Hi,

how you can set multi_hash 992 for RX 580 8GB? what is your OS version and driver version?

I only got unstable hashrate for RX 580 8GB on version 0.33b5 and 0.33b6 (even after lower multi_hash to 864 or 832). Vega 56 got stable hashrate on both version 0.33b5 and 0.33b6.
so currently all 580 8GB still using 0.33b4 and Vega 56 using 0.33b6.

edit : all related to CN-Heavy variant.

Thanks.
580 8GB Micron "multi_hash": 992
https://fastpic.ru/view/98/2018/1110/b51b301024ef1a3f723873bfd4ecff3f.png.html
newbie
Activity: 31
Merit: 0

I read here opposite results, so:
* Ensure you're talking about CN-Heavy and related, CN-v8 is not concerned by the 0.33b6 release
* Is it unstable on the 8Gb RX and Vega only? Sure that's the most common cards, but if this is the status, it's an important detail to track the bug down. I did my long-run tests on 2G and 4G cards only so far. If I need a 8G card to reproduce the bug, i've some, so i need to focus on them.

Sorry you are right - I haven't specified the algo - CN-heavy

580/8GB, 1250/2000

     { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 0, "multi_hash":992 },
     { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 0, "multi_hash":992 },

032q - stable 1165h/s

033b6 - unstable 1000-1220h/s (varies) and the total hash for the rig - lower that stable 1165 with older version for all cards.

Same situation is on vega56.

Lowering milti_hash, only decrease the hasrate, the fluctuations remain. 4GB no problem.


Hi,

how you can set multi_hash 992 for RX 580 8GB? what is your OS version and driver version?

I only got unstable hashrate for RX 580 8GB on version 0.33b5 and 0.33b6 (even after lower multi_hash to 864 or 832). Vega 56 got stable hashrate on both version 0.33b5 and 0.33b6.
so currently all 580 8GB still using 0.33b4 and Vega 56 using 0.33b6.

edit : all related to CN-Heavy variant.

Thanks.

Windows 10, Adrenalin 18.6.1

https://i.imgur.com/SY1QjmV.jpg

Same config on vegas, hashing 1630h/s.
jr. member
Activity: 176
Merit: 2

I read here opposite results, so:
* Ensure you're talking about CN-Heavy and related, CN-v8 is not concerned by the 0.33b6 release
* Is it unstable on the 8Gb RX and Vega only? Sure that's the most common cards, but if this is the status, it's an important detail to track the bug down. I did my long-run tests on 2G and 4G cards only so far. If I need a 8G card to reproduce the bug, i've some, so i need to focus on them.

Sorry you are right - I haven't specified the algo - CN-heavy

580/8GB, 1250/2000

     { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 0, "multi_hash":992 },
     { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 0, "multi_hash":992 },

032q - stable 1165h/s

033b6 - unstable 1000-1220h/s (varies) and the total hash for the rig - lower that stable 1165 with older version for all cards.

Same situation is on vega56.

Lowering milti_hash, only decrease the hasrate, the fluctuations remain. 4GB no problem.


Hi,

how you can set multi_hash 992 for RX 580 8GB? what is your OS version and driver version?

I only got unstable hashrate for RX 580 8GB on version 0.33b5 and 0.33b6 (even after lower multi_hash to 864 or 832). Vega 56 got stable hashrate on both version 0.33b5 and 0.33b6.
so currently all 580 8GB still using 0.33b4 and Vega 56 using 0.33b6.

edit : all related to CN-Heavy variant.

Thanks.
newbie
Activity: 54
Merit: 0
I currently use SRB to mine XMR.

The timings of both my RX 570 are optimized with Polaris Bios Editor 1.6.7 which gives more performance than SRB Polaris.

RX 570 4G Samsung
GPU 1280 MHz 990 mV
Memory 2110 990 mV
989 h/s

RX 570 8G Micron
GPU 1280 Hz 980 mV
Memory 2220 Mhz 980 mV
977 h/s

Their config for SRB Miner is pretty simple:
  { "id": 0, "intensity": 0, "threads": 2},
  { "id": 1, "intensity": 0, "threads": 2},
newbie
Activity: 7
Merit: 0
Hello,
I need some help,
I have 4 RX 580 nitro + (8go) , 1 hynix , 3 micron . I was mining with SRB at 850h/s each( V8 xmr)

I did this to increase my hashrate.
- Custom build with SRB Polaris ( I just pressed PIMP my strap then save BIOS and flash)
- then I DDU my old driver and install new one 18.6.1.
- then used atidmkpacher
- I tried the latest version of the miner

But now I'm mining at 350h/s each...
compute mode, enabled?
Thanks, I forgot that. Now it's better but I'm still at 850h/s with 1250 clock 2200 memory..
Experiment with the values "multi_hash" 832, 864, 896, 944.
newbie
Activity: 105
Merit: 0
Hello,
I need some help,
I have 4 RX 580 nitro + (8go) , 1 hynix , 3 micron . I was mining with SRB at 850h/s each( V8 xmr)

I did this to increase my hashrate.
- Custom build with SRB Polaris ( I just pressed PIMP my strap then save BIOS and flash)
- then I DDU my old driver and install new one 18.6.1.
- then used atidmkpacher
- I tried the latest version of the miner

But now I'm mining at 350h/s each...
compute mode, enabled?
Thanks, I forgot that. Now it's better but I'm still at 850h/s with 1250 clock 2200 memory..
newbie
Activity: 7
Merit: 0
Hello,
I need some help,
I have 4 RX 580 nitro + (8go) , 1 hynix , 3 micron . I was mining with SRB at 850h/s each( V8 xmr)

I did this to increase my hashrate.
- Custom build with SRB Polaris ( I just pressed PIMP my strap then save BIOS and flash)
- then I DDU my old driver and install new one 18.6.1.
- then used atidmkpacher
- I tried the latest version of the miner

But now I'm mining at 350h/s each...
compute mode, enabled?
newbie
Activity: 105
Merit: 0
Hello,
I need some help,
I have 4 RX 580 nitro + (8go) , 1 hynix , 3 micron . I was mining with SRB at 850h/s each( V8 xmr)

I did this to increase my hashrate.
- Custom build with SRB Polaris ( I just pressed PIMP my strap then save BIOS and flash)
- then I DDU my old driver and install new one 18.6.1.
- then used atidmkpacher
- I tried the latest version of the miner

But now I'm mining at 350h/s each...
member
Activity: 190
Merit: 59
I have switched all my miners to heavy. 50 Vega cards total. Seems to be stable so far. I will mine for 24 hours and if stable I will share here all the setup I have. I believe I will have around 85 000 pool hashrate after fees deduction, and consumption of around 8000W from the wall.
newbie
Activity: 31
Merit: 0

I read here opposite results, so:
* Ensure you're talking about CN-Heavy and related, CN-v8 is not concerned by the 0.33b6 release
* Is it unstable on the 8Gb RX and Vega only? Sure that's the most common cards, but if this is the status, it's an important detail to track the bug down. I did my long-run tests on 2G and 4G cards only so far. If I need a 8G card to reproduce the bug, i've some, so i need to focus on them.

Sorry you are right - I haven't specified the algo - CN-heavy

580/8GB, 1250/2000

     { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 0, "multi_hash":992 },
     { "mode" : "GPU", "worksize" : 8, "alpha" : 64, "beta" : 8, "gamma" : 4, "delta" : 4, "epsilon" : 4, "zeta":4, "index" : 0, "multi_hash":992 },

032q - stable 1165h/s

033b6 - unstable 1000-1220h/s (varies) and the total hash for the rig - lower that stable 1165 with older version for all cards.

Same situation is on vega56.

Lowering milti_hash, only decrease the hasrate, the fluctuations remain. 4GB no problem.
full member
Activity: 417
Merit: 105
Thanks, and that's also my first idea: recent JCEs are faster but support a lot less to mine on 99% available memory. The trick is that the b5 and b6 no longer need to use all memory to get fast, I tried to configure my 4G cards exactly like my 2G (with about 1900M memory allocated) and they mined fast. Increasing the 4G cards load over 2G gave very little extra speed at the cost of a very unstable hashrate.

Maybe the fix is just to warm users to update their older config and use less memory. I'm afraid a lot of users just updated their binary keeping the old config on 8G with maximum memory load, as it was the rule on previous versions, and is still on other miners like Cast or SRB.

To all who have the problem: configure your 8G card like if it was a 6G, leaving free vram on it and retry. I'd expect to get -1% speed and a very more stable hashrate.
I remember this rule from older Claymore 9 with mode -a 1: it provided +2% extra perf with +20% power consumption, 100% memory usage and random crashes. Not a good deal.

Hey JCE, thanks for all your wonderful miner work over quite some time.

As you know the b6 and b5 are very unstable for rx 8gb.  Based on reading this response that you wrote, I understood that you are saying to lower the multi-hash a bit?  The multihash is what determines the amount of memory used correct?  So perhaps going from 944 to 896 might be a good solution?  Can u elaborate on this proposed solution?  Thanks!!

Keep working hard you are the best around.
newbie
Activity: 7
Merit: 0
Tell please the optimal manual configuration settings for AMD RX5XX/4XX with 8 GB  for  cryptonight-saber  bittube
I found on the forum only for 4 GB cards

Sapphire Radeon NITRO+ RX 580 8GB (11265-01-20G)
{ "mode": "GPU", "worksize": 8, "alpha": 64, "beta": 8, "gamma": 4, "delta": 4, "epsilon": 4, "zeta": 4, "index": 2, "multi_hash": 832 },
{ "mode": "GPU", "worksize": 8, "alpha": 64, "beta": 8, "gamma": 4, "delta": 4, "epsilon": 4, "zeta": 4, "index": 2, "multi_hash": 832 },

or, and

{ "mode": "GPU", "worksize": 8, "alpha": 64, "beta": 8, "gamma": 4, "delta": 4, "epsilon": 4, "zeta": 4, "index": 2, "multi_hash": 896 },
{ "mode": "GPU", "worksize": 8, "alpha": 64, "beta": 8, "gamma": 4, "delta": 4, "epsilon": 4, "zeta": 4, "index": 2, "multi_hash": 896 },
legendary
Activity: 1891
Merit: 3096
All good things to those who wait
What is the power draw from the wall for CN heavy and v8 for 570 and 580 cards?
newbie
Activity: 39
Merit: 0
What you need is already available to script this:

* Do short tests: parameter --autoclose N to close after N minutes (the 1st minute has no fee)
* Generate a different config for each test: just generate the JSON config, it's a piece of standard JSON
* Read the hashrate: the JSON output is perfect, or use --log then parse the file

and repeat repeat until you get the optimum.

Yes, i do understand this can be done the hard way but i was asking for an easy way that would come in a bat file with the miner for every user to test and then be able to report the findings for the git.
newbie
Activity: 29
Merit: 0
JSON: is it really forbidden by the json standard to write
Code:
"a" : 
{42}
rather than
Code:
"a" :{
42}
?

It may be acceptable by json standard but any json validator fixes the code that way.
May be the problem occurs when using 'json.parse' where every single string should be understood as it should be. For example the string starting with "hashrate": should end with a value or a bracket.
I maybe wrong ofcourse.

Some headers like 'Access-Control-Allow-Origin' and 'Access-Control-Allow-Methods' are missing. Which are needed to make for example GET requests.
As for json, there maybe some services or functions need an iconic-like syntax to work properly.
full member
Activity: 1120
Merit: 131
It's online 0.33b6 GPU

I mined Haven for 48 hours on 3 capricious RX and had a very stable hashrate, varying +/- 2% not more, I hope it will be better for everybody.

My GPUs could get through the warmup, still with swings (mostly RAM frequency, sometimes core freq). Declared speed in itself is highly improved compared to my reference JCE 0.32G version, +15% for same power draw (at wall). If my computer stay stable during the night, I'll check the reported HR at the pool.

Almost 9hs mining tube and counting.
Max speed is 2316H/s, I had never got above 2030H/s with my reference 0.32G version, so that's a solid +15% speed.
Current effective HR: 2250H/s.
Power draw at the wall: 365-370W, this include the CPU mining which consumes around 30W.

That's a HUGE improvement in terms of speed with the same wattage, impressive.


One important point: I had to lower both core and mem clock on 2 out of 3 GPUs.

12H30mn mining with lastest version.

Max HR: 2318H/s
Effective: 2193H/s
Power draw: still 365-370W
sr. member
Activity: 1484
Merit: 253
@UnclWish
I let the pre-b5 online on purpose, but that's very surprising you noticed no increase. I had +15/+20% on all the card I tested from the HD6950 to the RX. It's not impossible your Curacao chip doesn't get any extra speed, but very strange. And i dedicated the release to you, so sad Cry
Thank you for heavy algo opt! And thanx for dedicating this to me )))). On RX 580 I have some increase in heavy algo... Not 10% but about 5%. Now triyng to find parameters for stable speed...

270X - Pitcairn... Why Curacao? Maybe I didn't have increase cause of 3,5Gb vmem for OpenCL? Or wrong parameters... What parameters you recommend?
Pages:
Jump to: