Pages:
Author

Topic: [XMR] Monero Mining - page 21. (Read 264830 times)

legendary
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1131
June 18, 2015, 02:39:05 PM
Just for you to know, the mixing at monero.crypto-pool.fr is working and online.
We also added a faster payout for everyone by default.
Happy mining.
This looks nicely done. Are you sweeping the coinbase payments to an intermediate wallet then mixing from there?

Exactly.
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
June 18, 2015, 12:42:16 PM

Just for you to know, the mixing at monero.crypto-pool.fr is working and online.
We also added a faster payout for everyone by default.

Happy mining.


This looks nicely done. Are you sweeping the coinbase payments to an intermediate wallet then mixing from there?

legendary
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1131
June 18, 2015, 05:02:58 AM
 
Just for you to know, the mixing at monero.crypto-pool.fr is working and online.
We also added a faster payout for everyone by default.

Happy mining.
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
June 18, 2015, 03:38:21 AM
AFAIK a limiting factor is the L3 cache and runs best when each core has 2 MB of cache.  This is for more than 2 cores as a dual core always seems faster running 2 cores.

With a 4 core i5 whose specs I don't recall, running 2, 3 or 4 cores gave the same HR with the difference obviously being the CPU and power usage.


huh, that actually make sense.
I should try one by one thread count.

Yes, and measure power usage in addition to hash rate, if that is something you care about. Some configurations may produce the same or slightly less hash with much less power.

hero member
Activity: 896
Merit: 1000
June 18, 2015, 03:36:20 AM
AFAIK a limiting factor is the L3 cache and runs best when each core has 2 MB of cache.  This is for more than 2 cores as a dual core always seems faster running 2 cores.

With a 4 core i5 whose specs I don't recall, running 2, 3 or 4 cores gave the same HR with the difference obviously being the CPU and power usage.


I had the same observation. There is no difference between 2, 3 and 4 cores.
hero member
Activity: 1456
Merit: 567
June 17, 2015, 02:21:14 PM
AFAIK a limiting factor is the L3 cache and runs best when each core has 2 MB of cache.  This is for more than 2 cores as a dual core always seems faster running 2 cores.

With a 4 core i5 whose specs I don't recall, running 2, 3 or 4 cores gave the same HR with the difference obviously being the CPU and power usage.


huh, that actually make sense.
I should try one by one thread count.
full member
Activity: 199
Merit: 100
June 17, 2015, 02:08:23 PM
Guess I'll have to try my way forward then.

Will problably keep of buying the 290x untill some more details about the 300 series are out.

One card that cought my attention is the R9 nano, 175w and faster then the 290x sounds a bit to good to be true. ( http://videocardz.com/56609/amd-radeon-r9-fury-x-r9-fury-x2-and-r9-nano-detailed-some-more )

legendary
Activity: 1624
Merit: 1008
June 17, 2015, 12:27:40 PM
AFAIK a limiting factor is the L3 cache and runs best when each core has 2 MB of cache.  This is for more than 2 cores as a dual core always seems faster running 2 cores.

With a 4 core i5 whose specs I don't recall, running 2, 3 or 4 cores gave the same HR with the difference obviously being the CPU and power usage.

hero member
Activity: 1456
Merit: 567
June 17, 2015, 12:00:10 PM
If I have 8 Core processor, is it better to use "-t 8" or not using "-t 8"?

so turns out, i got better on 4 thread that 8 thread, is it just visual bug?
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
June 08, 2015, 11:44:04 PM
It's closely related to L3 cache.

750Ti has 2MB L3 and the 970 has like 1.5MB.

smooth or someone posted about it somewhere; I remember reading it.

Because the cryptonote algo needs ~2MB to operate, so if it can be kept in on-die memory, versus (V)RAM, it is significantly faster.

It applies to CPUs and GPUs.
That's why smooth and them always say to use L3 cache size divided by 2 to determine the optimal number of threads to utilize when mining on a CPU.

For CPUs that is true (cache per core). For GPUs, there are so many instances of the algorithm operating at once (each randomly accessing 2 MB of data) that caches of that scale are largely irrelevant. What matters is the pipelining and other low level details of the memory architecture, so it is hard to say how a different GPU will perform without trying it (or very careful low level analysis of the architecture, which in many cases isn't even publicly available).
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 502
June 08, 2015, 11:34:16 PM
It's closely related to L3 cache.

750Ti has 2MB L3 and the 970 has 1.75MB, IIRC.

smooth or someone posted about it somewhere; I remember reading it.

Because the cryptonote algo needs ~2MB to operate, so if it can be kept in on-die memory, versus (V)RAM, it is significantly faster.

It applies to CPUs and GPUs.
That's why smooth and them always say to use L3 cache size divided by 2 to determine the optimal number of threads to utilize when mining on a CPU.
legendary
Activity: 1260
Merit: 1008
June 08, 2015, 06:24:09 AM
Thinking about adding a few 290x cards to my rig.

Do you think there will be a big difference in hash with the upcoming 390x cards?

As I understand it they are a rebrand of 290x but with 8gig memory instead of 4gig. Not sure how the memory differance will affect the mining output?

Honestly, I don't know. From what I've gathered from various inquiries into nvidia owners, the hash rate doesn't scale well with.... pretty much anything.

a 750ti gets 250 - 280 hashrate. From this I assumed a 980 (or .... i forget what it was.. something that shoulda been ridiculous) should have gotten..

well lets see... 750ti has 640 cores, 980 has 2048 cores.

So yeah. If it scaled with cores it would be 800 h/s our of that card. The highest I've ever seen reported is 400 h/s. That coulda been with a 970. Regardless, it was way less than expected.

And meanwhile, this guy:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/high-hash-rates-mining-xmr-monero-with-gtx-570-getting-220-hs-1026287

is reporting 220 h/s on a GTX 570, which has 480 cores.

My hunch is that cryptonight on GPUs has more to do with the speed of each processor that can access 2 MB of fast memory. So perhaps with the increased memory on the new card, you can push more cores through?

I dunno though, and I've only researched nvidia cards - no idea how the ATI architecture differs. I've found it odd that my 750ti only uses 1 gig of its RAM (it has 2 gigs), and I can't seem to push it farther with any thread setting.
full member
Activity: 199
Merit: 100
June 08, 2015, 06:11:31 AM
Thinking about adding a few 290x cards to my rig.

Do you think there will be a big difference in hash with the upcoming 390x cards?

As I understand it they are a rebrand of 290x but with 8gig memory instead of 4gig. Not sure how the memory differance will affect the mining output?
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1000
June 06, 2015, 12:38:19 PM
i like to dig some XMR have a cpu intel 9450 12mb and amd7950, what miners are better ?


You need a CPU capable of AES, which is more expensive.


Intel Core 2 Quad Processor Q9450 does not have the AES instruction set.

Sorry, I don't think you can mine XMR with that CPU.

http://ark.intel.com/products/33923/Intel-Core2-Quad-Processor-Q9450-12M-Cache-2_66-GHz-1333-MHz-FSB

big shet,,,, must mine maggy or other

and with 7950 amd wich one is better miner for windows?
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
June 04, 2015, 04:39:56 AM
You can mine with a non AES but the HR is very low and the electricity costs will be greater than the value of the coin.

Sometimes this isn't true if your electricity is extremely cheap or free (for example if you're using electric heat). But it is certainly true that the efficiency of hash/watt is low.
legendary
Activity: 1624
Merit: 1008
June 03, 2015, 03:28:34 PM
You can mine with a non AES but the HR is very low and the electricity costs will be greater than the value of the coin.

I have a 2 core pentium and use the original LucasJones miner.  I get 35 H/s using both cores, that is 100% cpu usage Tongue
0.04 Monero a day Roll Eyes
hero member
Activity: 644
Merit: 502
June 03, 2015, 02:59:15 PM
i like to dig some XMR have a cpu intel 9450 12mb and amd7950, what miners are better ?


You need a CPU capable of AES, which is more expensive.


Intel Core 2 Quad Processor Q9450 does not have the AES instruction set.

Sorry, I don't think you can mine XMR with that CPU.

http://ark.intel.com/products/33923/Intel-Core2-Quad-Processor-Q9450-12M-Cache-2_66-GHz-1333-MHz-FSB
legendary
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1000
June 03, 2015, 02:33:46 PM
i like to dig some XMR have a cpu intel 9450 12mb and amd7950, what miners are better ?
legendary
Activity: 2968
Merit: 1198
May 20, 2015, 08:09:25 PM

Yes it is generally better to build GPU rigs with multiple GPUs per computer to minimize cost for motherboard, CPU, PSU, etc.. The cost curve is a bit less severe with Monero since you can mine on the CPU as well so the CPU+MB isn't pure overhead.


You need a CPU capable of AES, which is more expensive.

True, but there are plenty of fairly cheap ones. Example A8-7600 roughly 80 USD. Probably cheaper too, I didn't look very hard.


sr. member
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
May 20, 2015, 01:20:14 PM

Yes it is generally better to build GPU rigs with multiple GPUs per computer to minimize cost for motherboard, CPU, PSU, etc.. The cost curve is a bit less severe with Monero since you can mine on the CPU as well so the CPU+MB isn't pure overhead.


You need a CPU capable of AES, which is more expensive.
Pages:
Jump to: