Pages:
Author

Topic: [XPM] [ANN] Primecoin High Performance | HP14 released! - page 92. (Read 397616 times)

full member
Activity: 141
Merit: 100
Where do I go for the latest miner updates etc?
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 250
Both put together. To find out, just run a benchmark like passmark.
hero member
Activity: 530
Merit: 500
What is the best way to get an hp build working on OS X?

Having toyed with it for hours, I can conclusively say that installing VMWare Fusion with an image of Ubuntu and compiling / running it on there yields the best results. I don't know why, it just does. Natively, compiled in Mountain Lion, I get about half the performance from the same build compiled in the VM.

I hope helps you out.

Thank you.
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 250
Did I mention how everyone mocked me for buying the rack server?

"You'll mine 1 litecoin with it, maybe two"

 Cheesy
sr. member
Activity: 266
Merit: 250
the computer im using costed me 180 bucks. its a retired rack server. Tongue

Going to buy one of those when I get ~ 2 BTC playing with primecoins. =3
donator
Activity: 406
Merit: 252
Study the past, if you would divine the future.
the computer im using costed me 180 bucks. its a retired rack server. Tongue

thats awesome!
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 250
the computer im using costed me 180 bucks. its a retired rack server. Tongue
donator
Activity: 406
Merit: 252
Study the past, if you would divine the future.
What's your CPU? Mine is two quad-core xeons. same architecture as the old core 2 duo processors... im thinking maybe im getting good speeds because of the large amount of cache i have or something?

yea you have more i have one quadcore with 8gigs of ram lol, im jealous
sr. member
Activity: 287
Merit: 250
Just wanted to say great miner!  I feel like this is probably the most optimized miner on the market right now.  Looking over the source code of the original miner and yours I think I see a way to make the miner (potentially much) faster from a mathematical standpoint rather than a code-optimization standpoint.  My optimization centers around the Primorial and the loop that occurs in main.cpp on line 4622.

Before getting into the code, it is important to realize why a primorial is helpful (if you already understand this, skip this paragraph).  With numbers on the order of 2256 there is about a 1 in 177 chance that a random number is prime.  If you select 8 random numbers, then, the odds of all of them being prime is about 1 in 1 quintillion--impractically low.  If you limit your search to only odd numbers, though, the odds shoot up tremendously.  Further limiting your search to numbers not divisible by 3, 5, 7, and so on can cause the odds of finding a prime number to become much, much better.  If the hash value is divisible by lots of these small numbers then multiples of that hash ± 1 will not be divisible by any of those numbers.  Thus, it is convenient to use a hash that is already a multiple of 2 * 3 * 5 * 7 * ... as it will produce far more primes than another hash.

As I understand the aforementioned loop, the program is searching for a hash that is divisible by a primorial.  Each iteration of this loop requires a hash to be generated as it increments the nonce value.  In the present form the primorail is of degree 7 (line 4579: static const unsigned int nPrimorialHashFactor = 7).  I suspect that this value is carefully chosen and it's probably ideal with the way that it is written.  However, I think there's an additional step that can be added to make the process much faster.  Increasing the degree of the primorial is incredibly expensive as it gets larger, since adding the 8th prime requires 19 times as many hashes to be checked; the 9th prime requires 23 times as many, and so on.  There is another way, though.

Prime origins are required to be in the form O = H * N where O is the origin, H is the hash, and N is any integer; H is selected to be divisible by p#7 (the primorial shown above).  If we extend this to O = H * N * P2 where P2 is 19 * 23 * 29 * ... * 51--a product of primes starting after the last prime used in the existing search--then the checked origin is still valid (an integer times an integer is still an integer).  This grants the benefits of searching with a higher degree primorial while not requiring a longer search for a working hash.  

Nothing is free, though, as this method inflates the size of the primes to be checked.  If the fast modular exponentiation is implemented through the same method as is used on the Fermat Primality Test Wikipedia page then the algorithmic efficiency is O(log2(n) * log(log(n)) * log(log(log(n))) ).  There should be some sweet spot of how large of a primorial to use where the increased frequency of primes more than offsets the extra time required for the fast modular exponentiation.  It's possible that the sweet spot is 0 extra primes, but I think it's worth looking into.
Number theorist in the hizzouse!
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 250
What's your CPU? Mine is two quad-core xeons. same architecture as the old core 2 duo processors... im thinking maybe im getting good speeds because of the large amount of cache i have or something?
donator
Activity: 406
Merit: 252
Study the past, if you would divine the future.
you should upgrade to hp5, you got some awesome primespersec ive reached max of around 2500
sr. member
Activity: 406
Merit: 250


Second block I managed to mine with HP4. Seivesize 2M. I feel like getting adventurous and going to 4M...
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
Just wanted to say great miner!  I feel like this is probably the most optimized miner on the market right now.  Looking over the source code of the original miner and yours I think I see a way to make the miner (potentially much) faster from a mathematical standpoint rather than a code-optimization standpoint.  My optimization centers around the Primorial and the loop that occurs in main.cpp on line 4622.

Before getting into the code, it is important to realize why a primorial is helpful (if you already understand this, skip this paragraph).  With numbers on the order of 2256 there is about a 1 in 177 chance that a random number is prime.  If you select 8 random numbers, then, the odds of all of them being prime is about 1 in 1 quintillion--impractically low.  If you limit your search to only odd numbers, though, the odds shoot up tremendously.  Further limiting your search to numbers not divisible by 3, 5, 7, and so on can cause the odds of finding a prime number to become much, much better.  If the hash value is divisible by lots of these small numbers then multiples of that hash ± 1 will not be divisible by any of those numbers.  Thus, it is convenient to use a hash that is already a multiple of 2 * 3 * 5 * 7 * ... as it will produce far more primes than another hash.

As I understand the aforementioned loop, the program is searching for a hash that is divisible by a primorial.  Each iteration of this loop requires a hash to be generated as it increments the nonce value.  In the present form the primorail is of degree 7 (line 4579: static const unsigned int nPrimorialHashFactor = 7).  I suspect that this value is carefully chosen and it's probably ideal with the way that it is written.  However, I think there's an additional step that can be added to make the process much faster.  Increasing the degree of the primorial is incredibly expensive as it gets larger, since adding the 8th prime requires 19 times as many hashes to be checked; the 9th prime requires 23 times as many, and so on.  There is another way, though.

Prime origins are required to be in the form O = H * N where O is the origin, H is the hash, and N is any integer; H is selected to be divisible by p#7 (the primorial shown above).  If we extend this to O = H * N * P2 where P2 is 19 * 23 * 29 * ... * 51--a product of primes starting after the last prime used in the existing search--then the checked origin is still valid (an integer times an integer is still an integer).  This grants the benefits of searching with a higher degree primorial while not requiring a longer search for a working hash.  

Nothing is free, though, as this method inflates the size of the primes to be checked.  If the fast modular exponentiation is implemented through the same method as is used on the Fermat Primality Test Wikipedia page then the algorithmic efficiency is O(log2(n) * log(log(n)) * log(log(log(n))) ).  There should be some sweet spot of how large of a primorial to use where the increased frequency of primes more than offsets the extra time required for the fast modular exponentiation.  It's possible that the sweet spot is 0 extra primes, but I think it's worth looking into.

Well, sir, you've managed to impress me. I am a biologist...math is one fish two fish, red fish blue fish.
newbie
Activity: 23
Merit: 0
My optimization centers around the Primorial and the loop that occurs in main.cpp on line 4622.


Quote
Flat profile:

Each sample counts as 0.01 seconds.
  %   cumulative   self              self     total           
 time   seconds   seconds    calls  ms/call  ms/call  name   
 79.89     45.84    45.84     5698     8.04     8.04  CSieveOfEratosthenes::Weave()
 10.28     51.74     5.90     5694     1.04     1.04  CSieveOfEratosthenes::CSieveOfEratosthenes(unsigned int, unsigned int, __gmp_expr<__m
pz_struct [1], __mpz_struct [1]>&, __gmp_expr<__mpz_struct [1], __mpz_struct [1]>&, CBlockIndex*)
  9.03     56.92     5.18    62611     0.08     0.91  MineProbablePrimeChain(CBlock&, __gmp_expr<__mpz_struct [1], __mpz_struct [1]>&, bool
&, unsigned int&, unsigned int&, unsigned int&, unsigned int&, unsigned int&, __gmp_expr<__mpz_struct [1], __mpz_struct [1]>&)
  0.16     57.01     0.09  7019519     0.00     0.00  FermatProbablePrimalityTest(__gmp_expr<__mpz_struct [1], __mpz_struct [1]> const&, un
signed int&)



Without a doubt, the Weave function is the slowest of them all.  I haven't yet dissected it (and won't really claim to understand what it's trying to do yet), but since this ultimately is buried way below the void static BitcoinMiner(CWallet *pwallet)
 function, I'm guessing that anythign that would result in fewer calls to MineProbablePrimeChain would be a net very good thing.  OTOH, further optimizing Weave still looks like a good bet.
sr. member
Activity: 246
Merit: 250
My spoon is too big!
What is the best way to get an hp build working on OS X?

Having toyed with it for hours, I can conclusively say that installing VMWare Fusion with an image of Ubuntu and compiling / running it on there yields the best results. I don't know why, it just does. Natively, compiled in Mountain Lion, I get about half the performance from the same build compiled in the VM.

I hope helps you out.
donator
Activity: 406
Merit: 252
Study the past, if you would divine the future.
when would you use the x86 vs x64 version? I have a quadcore laptop running windows 7.

Right now I have the x86 running, is this correct for fastest performance? what would be the difference running 86 and 64?
member
Activity: 182
Merit: 10
Just wanted to say great miner!  I feel like this is probably the most optimized miner on the market right now.  Looking over the source code of the original miner and yours I think I see a way to make the miner (potentially much) faster from a mathematical standpoint rather than a code-optimization standpoint.  My optimization centers around the Primorial and the loop that occurs in main.cpp on line 4622.

Before getting into the code, it is important to realize why a primorial is helpful (if you already understand this, skip this paragraph).  With numbers on the order of 2256 there is about a 1 in 177 chance that a random number is prime.  If you select 8 random numbers, then, the odds of all of them being prime is about 1 in 1 quintillion--impractically low.  If you limit your search to only odd numbers, though, the odds shoot up tremendously.  Further limiting your search to numbers not divisible by 3, 5, 7, and so on can cause the odds of finding a prime number to become much, much better.  If the hash value is divisible by lots of these small numbers then multiples of that hash ± 1 will not be divisible by any of those numbers.  Thus, it is convenient to use a hash that is already a multiple of 2 * 3 * 5 * 7 * ... as it will produce far more primes than another hash.

As I understand the aforementioned loop, the program is searching for a hash that is divisible by a primorial.  Each iteration of this loop requires a hash to be generated as it increments the nonce value.  In the present form the primorail is of degree 7 (line 4579: static const unsigned int nPrimorialHashFactor = 7).  I suspect that this value is carefully chosen and it's probably ideal with the way that it is written.  However, I think there's an additional step that can be added to make the process much faster.  Increasing the degree of the primorial is incredibly expensive as it gets larger, since adding the 8th prime requires 19 times as many hashes to be checked; the 9th prime requires 23 times as many, and so on.  There is another way, though.

Prime origins are required to be in the form O = H * N where O is the origin, H is the hash, and N is any integer; H is selected to be divisible by p#7 (the primorial shown above).  If we extend this to O = H * N * P2 where P2 is 19 * 23 * 29 * ... * 51--a product of primes starting after the last prime used in the existing search--then the checked origin is still valid (an integer times an integer is still an integer).  This grants the benefits of searching with a higher degree primorial while not requiring a longer search for a working hash.  

Nothing is free, though, as this method inflates the size of the primes to be checked.  If the fast modular exponentiation is implemented through the same method as is used on the Fermat Primality Test Wikipedia page then the algorithmic efficiency is O(log2(n) * log(log(n)) * log(log(log(n))) ).  There should be some sweet spot of how large of a primorial to use where the increased frequency of primes more than offsets the extra time required for the fast modular exponentiation.  It's possible that the sweet spot is 0 extra primes, but I think it's worth looking into.

This!
hero member
Activity: 552
Merit: 500
64bit hp5 version crashes after a bit on my windows 7 box.. 64 bit.. with this..



I've had the hp4 client do this once in like 72 hours. Just restart.


yea this happens with in about 5-10 min of launching.. need to find hp4 which worked fine..

hero member
Activity: 530
Merit: 500
What is the best way to get an hp build working on OS X?
full member
Activity: 201
Merit: 100
Do we need to adjust the sievesize in accordance to upcoming increase in difficulty?
Was the optimal sieve size ever determined?  What is everyone using with hp5?
Pages:
Jump to: