Pages:
Author

Topic: [XMR] JCE Miner Cryptonight/forks, now with GPU! - page 85. (Read 90814 times)

legendary
Activity: 2296
Merit: 1031
Coin/Algo:  Alloy  /  cryptonight-alloy  

How would I determine optimized settings?  I guess I should see what I get on CN v7 to see if it's close to that 900 number.  any suggestions of coins to try?  Sumo?
Oh. Alloy is a harder variant of CN Heavy. You shouldn't mine CN-Heavy or CN-Alloy with CPUs, since their drop of hashrate in comparison to CN ist enormous, whereas GPUs aren't affected in the same way. CN-Heavy and CN-Alloy are tailormade for GPUs.  Sad Consider to mine a CN-Lite coin with your CPUs. You may reach around 2700 H/s with CN-Lite (Aeon, Turtlecoin) or about 1300 H/s with CN-Fast (Masari).  Cheesy If you want to mine CNv7, why not Monero? Smiley Sumo is back to ASIC friendly original CN. It's absurd to mine an ASIC coin with CPUs.  Undecided
Quote
I didn't know that about AMD FX Piledriver dies.  Your response is very informative.  Thank you for that.
No problem Smiley

ahhh, that's why I see all the negative comments on Sumo coin.  So much has changed with the cryptonight algorithm since the days when I mined with a few lowly AMD cards.  It is really interesting about all the variants.

Good to know about alloy coin.  It makes me want to throw some GPUs at it for a bit. 

Thanks for the CN-Lite and CN-Fast comments... just to be clear, for CPU mining, I want to look for CN-Lite --and-- CN-Fast algorithms?
jr. member
Activity: 37
Merit: 5
Coin/Algo:  Alloy  /  cryptonight-alloy  

How would I determine optimized settings?  I guess I should see what I get on CN v7 to see if it's close to that 900 number.  any suggestions of coins to try?  Sumo?
Oh. Alloy is a harder variant of CN Heavy. You shouldn't mine CN-Heavy or CN-Alloy with CPUs, since their drop of hashrate in comparison to CN ist enormous, whereas GPUs aren't affected in the same way. CN-Heavy and CN-Alloy are tailormade for GPUs.  Sad Consider to mine a CN-Lite coin with your CPUs. You may reach around 2700 H/s with CN-Lite (Aeon, Turtlecoin) or about 1300 H/s with CN-Fast (Masari).  Cheesy If you want to mine CNv7, why not Monero? Smiley Sumo is back to ASIC friendly original CN. It's absurd to mine an ASIC coin with CPUs.  Undecided
Quote
I didn't know that about AMD FX Piledriver dies.  Your response is very informative.  Thank you for that.
No problem Smiley
jr. member
Activity: 75
Merit: 1



I know my heavy is bad, i need to optimize it. I even tell it explicitely in my doc.



Have you seen the Heavy algo draft optimisations on Github?

Baz

ps. 6000 h/s with 4x vegas on Bittube   Cheesy
sr. member
Activity: 1484
Merit: 253
Even with --no-gpu option gpu miner doing something with OpenCL GPU at start. If GPU's mines on other miner and run your miner with --no-gpu option, it short freeze - even mouse hangs - and than all works fine. On other miner speed on GPU's drops on this moment.
On first GPU prototyps --no-gpu option disables that. On latest - no.
member
Activity: 350
Merit: 22
Version 0.31a CPU Windows online

Code:
Backported GPU netcode
Bittube-v4 (with better perf than any other cpu miner)
Now max is 256 cpu/gpu threads
new coin PrivatePay
case insensitive commands (pressing h or H for hashrate will both work now)
Sumokoin back to CN-classic
newbie
Activity: 11
Merit: 0
does the gpu miner compile fresh kernel every run?  It seems to be lot slower with multi GPU rigs.
EDIT:  Just read the posts above.

Yes, every run is freshly compiled and tied to that individual card for security purposes. JCE is aware that those of us with bigger multi-card rigs would love to see the total time spent at startup reduced and has commented that he will continue to look for ways to improve upon this startup time without compromising security.
EDIT:  Just saw your EDIT after I posted!   Cheesy
full member
Activity: 729
Merit: 114
does the gpu miner compile fresh kernel every run?  It seems to be lot slower with multi GPU rigs.
EDIT:  Just read the posts above.
legendary
Activity: 2296
Merit: 1031
question:  I'm using 2x opteron 6376 and get around 475 h/s using 16 of 32 available cores which seems to consume about 57% of CPU resources.  Could i tune this up to get better performance and also use the other 16 cores?  Thank you for any comments or suggestions.
What coin/algo?

The Opteron 6376 is basically two AMD FX Piledriver dies on one package. An FX 8300 hashes around 1000 H/s Cryptonight-Lite or 340 H/s with CN v7.

Your system with two Opteron 6376 (say four FX dies), but lower frequency, should be around FX-8300-hashrate * 4 * 2.3 / 3.3. So CN v7 hashrate should be VAGUELY 900 H/s for the whole system with optimized settings Smiley But that depends on what coin/algo you want to mine Smiley

Coin/Algo:  Alloy  /  cryptonight-alloy 

How would I determine optimized settings?  I guess I should see what I get on CN v7 to see if it's close to that 900 number.  any suggestions of coins to try?  Sumo?

I didn't know that about AMD FX Piledriver dies.  Your response is very informative.  Thank you for that.
jr. member
Activity: 31
Merit: 5
The people in other topic tried hard to convince me that my math is bad or I have issues with rigs, and simple change of miner increased my hashrate by like 10%. I have never been more happy to give 1.5% dev fee  Grin

Dear JCE, thanks for awesome miner, please keep developing!

You are not alone, who doubted the srb miner hash. I asked the doctor about the difference between the hash in the miner and the actual month before. Did not get a normal response. And the same people tried to ridicule my tests with numbers. The real difference in the hash was my estimate of about 6%
member
Activity: 350
Merit: 22
Thanks vmozara Smiley

I don't reply about the pool side difference. I don't want to start a dev war.
I just still say Claymore obviously tweaked the effective hashrate of his XMR miner against displayed hashrate, and he pretended in his doc that was because of "disabled optims" -5%. No problem with that, but a disabled optim should also lower the displayed hashrate. If you explicitely mine @500 minus 5% of "disabled optims" you must display 475. Period.

Note that the GPU devfees are 0.9% and not 1.5%.
1.5% is on the CPU part only, your 2KH/s vegas mine with 0.9% devfee.

Quote
Normal minimalistic interface
Thanks, this is on purpose, I wanted something clear and simple, close to Claymore 9.7
I found later versions harder to read. For example, I give the pool-side value of the share, which is useful, but not the hexadecimal hash value, which is useless, except for the dev debug.

Quote
No monitoring of temperature and speed, voltage, frequency, their adjustment
No failover pools
Planned

Quote
There is not enough identification of the card on bus_id
There's currently the PCIe ID (named "Device" at JCE startup, in green)

Quote
A heavy algorithm on rx550 has an unstable hashrate
I know my heavy is bad, i need to optimize it. I even tell it explicitely in my doc.

Quote
Display sequence is not the same as in gpuz and overdrive
Debatable. I currently use the OpenCL order.

Quote
Very long compilation at startup. Rig on 12 cards about 5 minutes, this makes testing very difficult
When you test on 12 cards, first test on one card, then copy-paste the optimal values to the other 11 ones.
JCE OpenCL is generated on the fly and is bound to all environement, including the card, the parameters, the memory addresses and the coin. Recycling between two tests is impossible. Recycling between two same runs of JCE with exact same parameters is possible but would compromise security, I already explained why. But I don't give up finding a way that's both secure and faster.
jr. member
Activity: 31
Merit: 5
Hello! First, I thank the developer of this miner, very happy!
I would like to emphasize the minuses and advantages of the gpu miner at the moment:

Pro:
A real hash
Many coins supported
Normal minimalistic interface
Minimal commission

Con:
No monitoring of temperature and speed, voltage, frequency, their adjustment
There is not enough identification of the card on bus_id
Display sequence is not the same as in gpuz and overdrive
A heavy algorithm on rx550 has an unstable hashrate
Very long compilation at startup. Rig on 12 cards about 5 minutes, this makes testing very difficult Sad
No failover pools

Good luck to the developer!
member
Activity: 190
Merit: 59
Hi everybody,

I promised update on the hash rate verification and here is:

Total of 6 miners connected to monero ocean pool

Each miner is 14.3 to 14.7 KH/s depending of cards setups

When I press R, the miner gives effective hashrate and hash count - all 6 miners showed exact the same hash count as the pool (minus 1.5% devfee). My average effective hashrate is at least 14KH/s, which is less than blue letters HS/s, I saw JCE put some explanation about this in previous posts, but I didn't read the post well.

Anyway, with such huge effective hashrate, all my rigs are now on JCE miner. My moneroocean "chart average" went from around 70-73KH/s to around 78-80KH/s (hard to say due to only one day of testing but difference is massive and obvious) compared to srbminer 1.6.1 which I was using before.

Unfortunately I did not pay attention to power consumption but seems to be the same

The people in other topic tried hard to convince me that my math is bad or I have issues with rigs, and simple change of miner increased my hashrate by like 10%. I have never been more happy to give 1.5% dev fee  Grin

Dear JCE, thanks for awesome miner, please keep developing!
member
Activity: 350
Merit: 22
Quote
I now see that you are simply multiplying shares found for the non-dev pool x difficulty value and that luck is included in this Effective Hashrate number.

Correct. This is why I call it effective. This is not a long term average, but the real yield you got from the miner.

Quote
But 8 logical CPUs would be unused
I was correct, there are 4 cores (equals 8 logical cpu) unused. But i rewrote my sentence to be more explicit.

The CPU mining is very sensitive to any event on the computer, including yourself pressing H to get the hashrate (pressing H has higher priority than mining to stay responsive, so it stops the miner for a split second and leads to a lower hashrate).
With the computer/rig Idle and dedicated to CPU mining, the hashrate should be stable.

Quote
Sumokoin is not Cryptonight-Heavy anymore.
Thanks, I updated my doc.

I'm now building the updated CPU-only version 0.31 with new netcode, bittube-v4 and updated coins.
jr. member
Activity: 37
Merit: 5
question:  I'm using 2x opteron 6376 and get around 475 h/s using 16 of 32 available cores which seems to consume about 57% of CPU resources.  Could i tune this up to get better performance and also use the other 16 cores?  Thank you for any comments or suggestions.
What coin/algo?

The Opteron 6376 is basically two AMD FX Piledriver dies on one package. An FX 8300 hashes around 1000 H/s Cryptonight-Lite or 340 H/s with CN v7.

Your system with two Opteron 6376 (say four FX dies), but lower frequency, should be around FX-8300-hashrate * 4 * 2.3 / 3.3. So CN v7 hashrate should be VAGUELY 900 H/s for the whole system with optimized settings Smiley But that depends on what coin/algo you want to mine Smiley
jr. member
Activity: 37
Merit: 5
Hey Smiley

there are some errors or outdated infos in the README.md:

Quote
Another exclusive feature of JCE!
❗️ The no-cache mode is available only in the Windows version.
This is the reciprocal of multi-hash: for cases when your have wasted CPU cores, typically when mining Cryptonight Heavy. If you have a Ryzen 1700, 8 physical cores, 16 logical CPUs, 16M cache, the naive configuration would be 4 threads on 4 cores, 4M cache each, total 16M.

"cpu_threads_conf" : 

     { "cpu_architecture" : "ryzen", "affine_to_cpu" :  1, "use_cache" : true },
     { "cpu_architecture" : "ryzen", "affine_to_cpu" :  5, "use_cache" : true },
     { "cpu_architecture" : "ryzen", "affine_to_cpu" :  9, "use_cache" : true },
     { "cpu_architecture" : "ryzen", "affine_to_cpu" : 13, "use_cache" : true },
]
But 8 logical CPUs would be unused. Enabling them would flood the cache and lead to worse performance. What to do is making them mine, but with no cache, direct to memory.
When the Ryzen 7 1700 has 16 logical cores and only 4 are used, then not 8 logical cores are unused, but 12! Wink Perhaps you got confused by your own Ryzen 5 1600. There indeed 8 cores are unused.

Quote
Sumokoin, Loki, Ombre, Italo, Bloc, Niobio, Saronite are now Cryptonight-Heavy,
Sumokoin is not Cryptonight-Heavy anymore. They went back to original Cryptonight to be ASIC-friendly, whereas the existing Cryptonight-Heavy chain was renamed to Ryo-currency or simple Ryo.  Shocked
jr. member
Activity: 196
Merit: 1
Wow

I take a few days off and you lauch the JCE-Miner GPU version!

I'll try it today. How is the CN-Lite performance?
jr. member
Activity: 75
Merit: 1
its more about the cache than the cores, you can only run as many threads as the cache has capacity for the scrtchpads
legendary
Activity: 2296
Merit: 1031
question:  I'm using 2x opteron 6376 and get around 475 h/s using 16 of 32 available cores which seems to consume about 57% of CPU resources.  Could i tune this up to get better performance and also use the other 16 cores?  Thank you for any comments or suggestions.
newbie
Activity: 34
Merit: 0
any hints why Ryzen starts with 180hs per Thread and drop to 130hs after some minutes (CNV7 lite)

and yes..got many duplicates at no nicehash pool

I have same issue. R7 1700x starts with 2200+ h/s and after few minutes h/r drops to 1700 h/s. Also all system GPU slow down h/r too . XMR-Stak (with similar settings for CPU) gets ~ 2140 h/s, but all works great.
P.S. Tested on two different motherboards (B350 and X470 chipsets) with two different instances of the processor.
newbie
Activity: 11
Merit: 0
hello,

When i say the fees are included, that means the displayed hashrate is the same no matter if you're in a devfee session or not. This is the raw physical hashrate.
If you punch h, you lock the mining thread to force it to update the hashrate counter and display it on screen, so if you punch again and again, it will lower the hashrate, that's normal. This is the same for the CPU version. Better use the JSON http output which is updated in the network thread, and does not cause such a problem. From your browser, you can press F5 as much as you want. But not H from the console.

Effective hashrate should converge mathematicaly to lower than the average physical hashrate. Normaly by ~2% on a very long term.
If it's higher, so you had a good luck biasis. You can check that number two ways :
1. Look at your pool, you should get a similar hashrate (the computation range of the pool may be different from JCE, but on the long term, they should converge).
2. Get your total hashes and divide it by the uptime. You should get the same value. The hashes themselve can be checked against your pool history, or JCE log, and the uptime by... your wall clock Smiley

A difference can be explained by some instant peaks from your cards that make you mine faster but may not be reported by the blue instant hashrate, if you mine so fast that the 512 hashes are obsoleted fast. I admit that 512 was good for CPU, which can mine at 150h/s per core at best, but that's just half a second for a Vega. Average rate over half a second is too low. This is the problem. Good remark, i'll increase the time period for average of fast cards like Vega Wink

Version 0.30c online
Quote
Netcode fixes
Bittube v4

Thanks for the thorough reply. I will indeed use the JSON to monitor moving forward. I fully understand the way luck is involved and that a hashrate shown poolside based on shares found will need considerable time to converge with physical hashrate. I now see that you are simply multiplying shares found for the non-dev pool x difficulty value and that luck is included in this Effective Hashrate number.

I suspect that you are right about the possible spikes in physical h/s on Vegas causing confusion since the current sample size for physical averages is actually closer to .25 seconds!
Pages:
Jump to: