Author [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: GPU miners comparsion  (Read 3377 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Aber

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
GPU miners comparsion
« on: January 12, 2014, 07:47:23 PM »

There are few in a wild, so maybe we will make a comparsion of them to use best one?

Results

1gh v1.2 - ubuntu 13.04 - 280x (1100/1500) ~1070 cpm
1gh v1.2 - windows 8 64 bit - 7970 3gb (1040/1500) ~1120 cpm

1gh v1.2 - ubuntu x64 - GTX 570 ~960+ cpm
1gh v1.2 - ubuntu x64 - GTX 560Ti ~660+ cpm

1gh v1.2 - AWS g2.2xlarge ~687cpm

cudapts v2014-01-12 - linux - GTX690 (stock clock settings) ~1780 cpm

PtsGPUz0.2ab.exe - windows 8 64 bit - GTX 570 ~830 cpm
« Last Edit: January 14, 2014, 06:44:14 PM by Aber »

Offline phrozenspite

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 58
    • View Profile
Re: GPU miners comparsion
« Reply #1 on: January 12, 2014, 08:30:49 PM »
1gh v1.2 - windows 8 64 bit.  sapphire 7970 ghz edition 3gb, 1040 core 1500 ram clock speed. ~1120 CPM
supporting Newmine for a fair Memorycoin
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=389386.0

Offline dga

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
    • View Profile
Re: GPU miners comparsion
« Reply #2 on: January 12, 2014, 10:32:57 PM »
1gh v1.2 - windows 8 64 bit.  sapphire 7970 ghz edition 3gb, 1040 core 1500 ram clock speed. ~1120 CPM

Just for fun:

cudapts (linux) v2014-01-12 GTX690, stock clock settings, 1780 c/m.

Offline phrozenspite

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 58
    • View Profile
Re: GPU miners comparsion
« Reply #3 on: January 12, 2014, 10:35:21 PM »
1gh v1.2 - windows 8 64 bit.  sapphire 7970 ghz edition 3gb, 1040 core 1500 ram clock speed. ~1120 CPM

Just for fun:

cudapts (linux) v2014-01-12 GTX690, stock clock settings, 1780 c/m.
yeah your core from what i've seen with the nvidia results seems to possibly be faster, i'll be curious to see when someone finally implements openCL in more than a benchmarking tool
supporting Newmine for a fair Memorycoin
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=389386.0

Offline Aber

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 23
    • View Profile
Re: GPU miners comparsion
« Reply #4 on: January 12, 2014, 10:38:53 PM »
Wow :) but 690 is like 2x680?

Offline reorder

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
    • View Profile
Re: GPU miners comparsion
« Reply #5 on: January 12, 2014, 10:40:39 PM »
1gh v1.2 - windows 8 64 bit.  sapphire 7970 ghz edition 3gb, 1040 core 1500 ram clock speed. ~1120 CPM

Just for fun:

cudapts (linux) v2014-01-12 GTX690, stock clock settings, 1780 c/m.
Do you mind to try 1gh miner on this one? That would give a general idea how much OpenCL is inferior to CUDA.

Offline dga

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
    • View Profile
Re: GPU miners comparsion
« Reply #6 on: January 12, 2014, 10:44:16 PM »
1gh v1.2 - windows 8 64 bit.  sapphire 7970 ghz edition 3gb, 1040 core 1500 ram clock speed. ~1120 CPM

Just for fun:

cudapts (linux) v2014-01-12 GTX690, stock clock settings, 1780 c/m.
Do you mind to try 1gh miner on this one? That would give a general idea how much OpenCL is inferior to CUDA.

Unfortunately, that machine also has one of my coin wallets on it, and I don't run untrusted binaries on it. :(

(Mind you, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the 1gh miner - but there's been a lot of malware floating around.)

Offline dga

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
    • View Profile
Re: GPU miners comparsion
« Reply #7 on: January 12, 2014, 10:51:48 PM »
1gh v1.2 - windows 8 64 bit.  sapphire 7970 ghz edition 3gb, 1040 core 1500 ram clock speed. ~1120 CPM

Just for fun:

cudapts (linux) v2014-01-12 GTX690, stock clock settings, 1780 c/m.
Do you mind to try 1gh miner on this one? That would give a general idea how much OpenCL is inferior to CUDA.

Unfortunately, that machine also has one of my coin wallets on it, and I don't run untrusted binaries on it. :(

(Mind you, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the 1gh miner - but there's been a lot of malware floating around.)

But - probably the best case thus far is the EC2 results showing 480 c/m vs about 780.  One might expect the same per-core results to extend to the 690, so maybe it would get about 1150?  (total SWAG)

Offline reorder

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 400
    • View Profile
Re: GPU miners comparsion
« Reply #8 on: January 12, 2014, 11:00:18 PM »
1gh v1.2 - windows 8 64 bit.  sapphire 7970 ghz edition 3gb, 1040 core 1500 ram clock speed. ~1120 CPM

Just for fun:

cudapts (linux) v2014-01-12 GTX690, stock clock settings, 1780 c/m.
Do you mind to try 1gh miner on this one? That would give a general idea how much OpenCL is inferior to CUDA.

Unfortunately, that machine also has one of my coin wallets on it, and I don't run untrusted binaries on it. :(

(Mind you, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the 1gh miner - but there's been a lot of malware floating around.)

But - probably the best case thus far is the EC2 results showing 480 c/m vs about 780.  One might expect the same per-core results to extend to the 690, so maybe it would get about 1150?  (total SWAG)
I totally understand your concern about running unknown binaries, yet, maybe there is a way to arrange it securely without much hassle? For example, in VM with mapped PCI device if you are already using such setup for development?

480cpm must be something else, 1gh miner yields 687cpm on g2.2xlarge and I believe there is no more room for optimization (but it is possible that different Nvidia OpenCL compiler versions may produce different results).

Offline zvs

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 193
    • View Profile
Re: GPU miners comparsion
« Reply #9 on: January 13, 2014, 01:16:16 AM »
What is "cudapts"?  shrug

I am getting 1750 cpm with gtx 780 +150 core -100 memory on "PtsGPUz0.2ab"
Pls to join Primedice 3 and frolic about merrily whilst gambling awe-inspiring quantities of bitcoins. The power of Christ compels you.

I have a dogecoin p2pool at Nogleg.

Offline dga

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 122
    • View Profile
Re: GPU miners comparsion
« Reply #10 on: January 13, 2014, 01:39:51 AM »
What is "cudapts"?  shrug

I am getting 1750 cpm with gtx 780 +150 core -100 memory on "PtsGPUz0.2ab"

ptsgpuz0.2ab is a windows port that combines jhprotominer with the GPU core code from cudapts.  Your performance should be similar to that achieved by cudapts, at least as of a version or two ago.

Offline emski

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1283
    • View Profile
    • http://lnkd.in/nPbhxG
Re: GPU miners comparsion
« Reply #11 on: January 14, 2014, 07:31:02 AM »
CPU: I7 3770K
RAM: 16GB DDR3 1600mhz
GTX 570 (no OC)
Windows 8 64

PtsGPUz0.2ab.exe - collisions/min: 830.5174 Shares total: 4301 *

* note these results are while the following CPU miner is running:
Software: yam-yvg1900-M7i-win64-ivy-bridge
Threads:5
PTS Agg. CPM: 269.0;(1024 MB)(AV=9 after AV-optimization)

And the PC is still usable, except for watching movies.

Offline drin

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 9
    • View Profile
Re: GPU miners comparsion
« Reply #12 on: January 15, 2014, 06:28:48 AM »
And the PC is still usable, except for watching movies.
Use Quick Sync ;)

Offline COOLERbyPSP

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: GPU miners comparsion
« Reply #13 on: January 18, 2014, 06:41:13 AM »
1gh v1.2 - windows 8.1 64 bit - [email protected] 2gb (940/1320) ~1180 cpm
                                             - 7970 3gb (1125/1575) ~1020 cpm
1gh v1.2 - windows 7 64 bit - 6950 1gb (850/1200) ~80 cpm (FFFFFFFFUUUUUUUU)
« Last Edit: January 18, 2014, 11:12:16 PM by COOLERbyPSP »

Offline earthbound

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 120
    • View Profile
    • earthbound.io
Re: GPU miners comparsion
« Reply #14 on: January 19, 2014, 03:54:38 AM »
Please update the spreadsheet which I link to from this post:

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2437.0

--with anything I'm missing. I'm not sure whether I'd put any speed tests in it; maybe that could be another spreadsheet?
I think I'm not alone when I say I'd like to see more and more planets fall under the ruthless dominion of our solar system. -Jack Handey

 

Google+