BitShares Forum
Other => Graveyard => BitShares PTS => Topic started by: NaN on January 26, 2014, 08:41:40 pm
-
This is a OpenCL Momentum miner for AMD GPUs. The performance is 6700+ c/m on a R9 280X@1100Mhz, so that this seems to be the fastest released miner. Binaries are available for Windows and Linux.
NEW: First version of JSON-RPC Bitcredit solo miner: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/ycqnadnjp8rhsp0/AADKNyWsn0oShLPtNGCBliWba?dl=0
DOWNLOAD v2.1: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/0ijulsq12j3vxrb/AADkD4Snxy_AJD5oXTzZr1J_a?dl=0 This version has multi-pool support and pool-fallback, i.e. it connects to the next pool in a user specified list, if there is no connection to the current pool. Every 10 minutes it is checked whether a pool with higher priority is online again. Download and unpack the miner into a folder. Depending on the version of your installed Catalyst driver, copy the gpuhash_* files in the suitable subfolder into the binaries folder. I recommend Catalyst 14.9 or newer for clpts, but Catalyst 14.12 seems to be slower than Catalyst 14.9. Catalyst 14.6 and 14.7 should work with the binaries for Catalyst 14.9.
DOWNLOAD v1.3: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/17dss1hon0338q6/AAAUUSvog-SsX_KDWJjAukzLa?dl=0
UPDATE 18: Version v2.1 of the miner is released and here is list of some changes:
- v2.1 fixes a bug in the stratum implementation, which produces invalid shares, if the current block includes any transactions. Furthermore, the README is updated and some other minor bugs are fixed.
- optimized algorithms. Algorithm 0 and 1 need ~1.3GB of GPU-RAM per thread and algorithms 2-7 only ~900 MB. Algorithm 6/7 is included for legacy and it is the same algorithm as 3/4 of clpts v1.3. Odd numbered algorithms are faster in cases, where only one thread per GPU is used.
- added stratum support and new pools. The developer fee for ypool.net is 2.5% and for all other pools 2.0%.
- added pool shares statistics, which show the accepted share value on connection basis.
- minor bugfixes
known issues: The miner does not run if the installed Catalyst driver is too old or the wrong binaries are used. Some configurations crash during startup and the issue depends on the thread counts. The 32-bit Windows executable does not show this behaviour and works on 64-bit Windows. Otherwise, you might run several instances of the miner. The miner is not optimized to run on 5000 and 6000 series GPUs and needs at least ~900 MB free GPU memory per thread.
NOTE 1: When you post errors I appreciate some information about the operating system (Windows or Linux / 32bit or 64bit is sufficient) and the used Catalyst driver. Furthermore you should suppress the section between the stars of the output of the miner excluding the miner version (at the moment it hasn't any relevance but it will become important in the future). The Linux version is much faster than the Windows version on R9 290(X), which seems to be a driver issue.
NOTE 2: Please make sure that you are not using an outdated Catalyst version and read the README.
I would be grateful for donations to speed up the development of a version for Nvidia GPUs:
PTS: 68fBfJLqpqV3WR5GqmXWMgMHpJ9foPuGdU
BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
-
waiting for windows :)
-
Had to install boost 1.55 to get it to start and getting:
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 2 (deviceID 0): Pitcairn
Name of device #2 / 2 (deviceID 1): Hawaii
spawning 2 worker thread(s)
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
[WORKER1] Hello, World!
Error during compilation of program for device 'Pitcairn':
Internal error: Input OpenCL binary is not for the target!
Update:
it's working on the 290X at 2200c/m, it will not start on the 270X in a separate instance.
-
thx. i'm working on fixing this.
@290X: did you try to use 2 processes on one card? for me that increased the effective speed
-
thx. i'm working on fixing this. Does this work with clpts <your-address> 1? then it will use the hawaii gpu. i only tested for them
It works on the 290X Hawaii GPU but not the Pitcairn 270X.
-
thx. i'm working on fixing this.
@290X: did you try to use 2 processes on one card? for me that increased the effective speed
Run two copies of the app on the same card?
-
thx. i'm working on fixing this.
@290X: did you try to use 2 processes on one card? for me that increased the effective speed
Run two copies of the app on the same card?
yes. the kernels seem to be a little bit too short, so there is some additional latency, which can be hidden by additional instances
-
Fired up two instances, getting 2064c/m on first instance and 1260 on 2nd.
-
well, wait a few minutes so that the values can stabilize. the program averages over all collisions. normally both instances will get the same average so i would take your lowest value times 2 for a first guess when running two instances.
-
well, wait a few minutes so that the values can stabilize. the program averages over all collisions. normally both instances will get the same average so i would take your lowest value times 2 for a first guess when running two instances.
yeap first instance is down to 1727 while second is at 1277 solid.
-
will you add other pools support? (for example 1gh, to compare it with their miner?)
-
will you add other pools support? (for example 1gh, to compare it with their miner?)
i have no plan to support ypool.net (it's a good pool, but it became too large). i will support other pools/protocols as soon as there are enough fees or donations. but i think you can compare miners by comparing c/m after a few hours of runtime. the actual income is given by the pool's luck and payout policy.
-
hi，i am new to linux，would you please explain it in detail that what i need and how to run the linux version miners，thanks
-
latest build getting this on launch
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Pitcairn':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 160)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 174)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 167)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 221)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 284)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 291)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Hawaii':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 160)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 174)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 167)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 221)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 284)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 291)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
works each on it's own instance - will not work as devices "0 1" but 2 separate instances works.
2332c/m on 290X
1150c/m on 270X
4 instances running fine - 2 on 290X (1900/1214) 2 on 270X (970/568)
-
ok, thanks. this is a little bit strange... i need to think about it.
@duckproto: the 270X has 4GB RAM, or? with 2GB two instances should not work
-
ok, thanks. this is a little bit strange... i need to think about it.
@duckproto: the 270X has 4GB RAM, or? with 2GB two instances should not work
both the 290 and 270 have 4GB each.
http://i.imgur.com/ykrZRpL.png (http://i.imgur.com/ykrZRpL.png)
-
I'm getting the following error...Any ideas?
user@user:~/Downloads/clpts$ ./clpts PtLx9kDLTXtR1ae3u7naXLPeGjjHZ1PGoR 0
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.7 RC2 <experimental>
** by NaN - based on ptsminer.
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmail.com
** PTS: PtLx9kDLTXtR1ae3u7naXLPeGjjHZ1PGoR
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 1 (deviceID 0): BeaverCreek
spawning 1 worker thread(s)
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
Error during compilation of program for device 'BeaverCreek':
Internal Error: cannot load bc application for linking
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
-
well, it seems that you are trying to use your integrated graphics. this will not be very fast if it would work.
my compiler outputs binaries for BeaverCreek so at least compiling has to work for you. i guess this is a driver bug. in my opinion drivers for APUs have a lot more bugs than the desktop drivers. which version of fglrx are you using?
-
8.982 kernel-3.2.0-57-generic-x86_64
(http://storage9.static.itmages.com/i/14/0127/h_1390791638_5328734_2e1918227a.png)
-
the driver is very old.
-
Tried it with a newer PC with a newer APU and the latest drivers. Got the following:
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 1 (deviceID 0): Devastator
spawning 1 worker thread(s)
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Devastator':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 160)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 174)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 167)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 221)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 284)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 291)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
error in gpuhash.cpp, line 99: Method clCreateBuffer(...) for binned_data failed (errorcode -61)
-
not enough memory. you need at least 1.25GB for the GPU. it is hopeless
-
Ok...thanks for your time
-
I am very curious to test on Windows with 2X R9 290x.
Soon a Windows version?
It works with 1GH?
Thank you in advance.
-
I'm working on a windows version and it will be released as soon as my toolchain for windows binaries works (likely today or tomorrow).
The miner can only connect to beeeeer.org at the moment but i plan to add additional pools.
-
UPDATE 4: Windows binaries are released and the README is updated with some help. The 32bit-Windows binaries are not testet yet; thus feedback is appreciated. A bug for 5000 and 6000 series GPUs is fixed but the miner is still not optimized for those cards[/quote]
can't run two instances in windows - first instance gets 'cannot connect to server' when second instance starts. unlike linux version, this can run both "0 1" cards @ 3800c/m using both cards. can't run one instance as you get this eventually http://i.imgur.com/otoWQaJ.gif (http://i.imgur.com/otoWQaJ.gif)
heading back to ubuntu...
-
I get the following error ...
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.7 RC2 <experimental>
** by NaN - based on ptsminer.
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmai
l.com
** PTS: PtLx9kDLTXtR1ae3u7naXLPeGjjHZ1PGoR
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 2): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 1 (deviceID 0): Tahiti
Vendor of platform #2 / 2: Intel(R) Corporation
error in gpuhash.h, line 131: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)
-
If it is Linux, this could indicate that there is no running Xserver. please always provide some info about the used catalyst driver and the operating system (32bit windows / 64bit windows / 64bit-linux)
In your case i think that the miner tries to get the devices of the intel opencl platform and perhaps fails because the intel opencl implementation does not support any of your devices (-1 means CL_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND). I need more information to decide that.
-
I had the same error I removed the Intel OpenCL SDK on one system, on the other in device manager show hidden devices and remove driver for Intel 4600 video driver.
You can confirm that the Intel OpenCL driver is installed by running cgminer -n
That solved my issue.
I get the following error ...
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.7 RC2 <experimental>
** by NaN - based on ptsminer.
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmai
l.com
** PTS: PtLx9kDLTXtR1ae3u7naXLPeGjjHZ1PGoR
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 2): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 1 (deviceID 0): Tahiti
Vendor of platform #2 / 2: Intel(R) Corporation
error in gpuhash.h, line 131: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)
-
ITS WORKING :D
Can you create such a miner for nvidia cards ?
-
Thanks for the feedback. I think that I simply remove the queries for other platforms. This would solve the issue, but in the long-term I rather want to support all vendors. Not exiting the miner on CL_DEVICE_NOT_FOUND would lead to some funny stuff with AMD GPUs on linux....
nvidia support will follow as soon as I have any devices on which I can do tests.
-
same to you
win7 64bit 270x
latest build getting this on launch
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Pitcairn':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 160)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 174)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 167)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 221)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 284)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 291)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Hawaii':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 160)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 174)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 167)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 221)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 284)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 291)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
works each on it's own instance - will not work as devices "0 1" but 2 separate instances works.
2332c/m on 290X
1150c/m on 270X
4 instances running fine - 2 on 290X (1900/1214) 2 on 270X (970/568)
-
Ubuntu run for 10 hours netted me this
45689 2014-01-27 18:53:23 3090 / 265884 -> 0.18518 PTS / 15.93 PTS -> PAID
45680 2014-01-27 17:56:13 15652 / 1332963 -> 0.18712 PTS / 15.94 PTS -> added
45630 2014-01-27 13:05:28 5392 / 456063 -> 0.18839 PTS / 15.93 PTS -> PAID
45617 2014-01-27 11:26:27 5707 / 466967 -> 0.19655 PTS / 16.08 PTS -> added
45599 2014-01-27 09:40:09 9167 / 689599 -> 0.21196 PTS / 15.94 PTS -> PAID
45558 2014-01-27 06:47:42 10171 / 742990 -> 0.21815 PTS / 15.94 PTS -> PAID
45514 2014-01-27 03:43:33 751 / 51862 -> 0.23074 PTS / 15.93 PTS -> PAID
45513 2014-01-27 03:29:39 13916 / 1051706 -> 0.21114 PTS / 15.96 PTS -> PAID
Windows run for 10 hours netted me
45763 2014-01-28 01:45:21 13478 / 1891447 -> 0.11355 PTS / 15.94 PTS -> added
Could just be the nature of PTS mining but Ubuntu build netted me 8 blocks to 1 in Windows version. Is the 35 seconds mining for you getting messed up and all blocks go to developer? Still getting this on start up in Windows.
http://i.imgur.com/NnE0nCJ.gif (http://i.imgur.com/NnE0nCJ.gif)
-
Could just be the nature of PTS mining but Ubuntu build netted me 8 blocks to 1 in Windows version. Is the 35 seconds mining for you getting messed up and all blocks go to developer? Still getting this on start up in Windows.
No, that is because of bad pool luck while you were mining in windows. beeeeer.org is a small pool with only a few generated blocks per day (mostly less than 10), but is has low fees (2.5%). Your windows output seems normal.
@rots: did you encounter any problems or does the miner work well?
-
first, after startup, it shows
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 160)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
...............
but can still work
second, I have 2 280x, it can't start 2 card in one instance, must run 2 instance.
third, after a while, maybe minutes or hours, it seems meet some abnormal sharetarget, and stop find share anymore(from gpu monitor, gpu sitll 100% load)
0[WORKER0] share found: 16819923 <-> 25205019 #4 (1542) @ 24
[WORKER0] share found: 18873581 <-> 42439404 #5 (1542) @ 24
[WORKER0] share found: 46607814 <-> 26833283 #6 (1546) @ 26
[WORKER0] share found: 33826928 <-> 19127522 #7 (1560) @ 32
[WORKER0] share found: 21017147 <-> 36827130 #8 (1560) @ 32
[WORKER0] share found: 64941930 <-> 11055332 #9 (1562) @ 33
[MASTER] 2014-Jan-28 21:43:00 | work received | sharetarget: 0000000100000000010
000000001000000000100000000010000000001000000
4th, If there's no network connection while starting, it will crash.
Could just be the nature of PTS mining but Ubuntu build netted me 8 blocks to 1 in Windows version. Is the 35 seconds mining for you getting messed up and all blocks go to developer? Still getting this on start up in Windows.
No, that is because of bad pool luck while you were mining in windows. beeeeer.org is a small pool with only a few generated blocks per day (mostly less than 10), but is has low fees (2.5%). Your windows output seems normal.
@rots: did you encounter any problems or does the miner work well?
-
the mess on the startup are the messages of the compiler. i can suppress those messages but it makes debugging harder.
4th, If there's no network connection while starting, it will crash.
a miner without network connection makes no sense... but perhaps i can quit the miner more silently
[MASTER] 2014-Jan-28 21:43:00 | work received | sharetarget: 0000000100000000010
000000001000000000100000000010000000001000000
wow, that sounds bad. is your connection ok? Linux or Windows? EDIT: did you reset your time? the time of the shares is a few seconds after January 1st 1970...
second, I have 2 280x, it can't start 2 card in one instance, must run 2 instance
did you try to run the miner with <name of executable> <your address> 0 1?
-
the mess on the startup are the messages of the compiler. i can suppress those messages but it makes debugging harder.
4th, If there's no network connection while starting, it will crash.
a miner without network connection makes no sense... but perhaps i can quit the miner more silently
sometimes when computer startup, it need time to re-acquire IP from DHCP server, but if miner startup at this time, it will crash. It's better to try to reconnect after a while, instead of crash.
[MASTER] 2014-Jan-28 21:43:00 | work received | sharetarget: 0000000100000000010
000000001000000000100000000010000000001000000
wow, that sounds bad. is your connection ok? Linux or Windows?
Win7 64bit, maybe connection not stable, like last issue, no one can gurrant connection 100% stable, it's better to handle it more robust.
second, I have 2 280x, it can't start 2 card in one instance, must run 2 instance
did you try to run the miner with <name of executable> <your address> 0 1?
if i use Miner address 0 1, both cards not work. I must use Miner address 0, and Miner address 1 , seperately.
-
The new version of the miner will be released soon and will resolve the issues. EDIT: v0.1 is released
-
The new version of the miner will be released soon and will resolve the issues. EDIT: v0.1 is released
congrats to your mighty miner!
the hashrate is really great on 3 x 290X: 2504 cpm + 2529 cpm + 2549 cpm with ~ 2-%-rejects / 1075gpu+1250mem
Edit: the rejects are down to ~0.7 %
the two instances-solution is in my eyes not so well, because after a time the hashing settles down on the 2 instances - but the rejects go high on the second instance to ~ 8 %
oh... i tested the new software on my HD6990 - only ~800 cpm compared to the higher rate at pts.1gh.com ~1280 cpm / on one GPU of the card
please contact the pts-mining-pool to discuss a possible cooperation - http://pts.1gh.com
for your next step with joining other (smaller) pools with your miner
-
ok, thanks. this is a little bit strange... i need to think about it.
@duckproto: the 270X has 4GB RAM, or? with 2GB two instances should not work
both the 290 and 270 have 4GB each.
http://i.imgur.com/ykrZRpL.png (http://i.imgur.com/ykrZRpL.png)
I was shocked to see there are some R9 270X versions with 4GB of memory... all this time I've only ever seen the 2GB versions... I would not have searched that out without noticing what you were doing... I shall now go palm slap my face.
so if 1 instance takes 1200MB, two takes 2400MB, are you able to run three for 3600MB on your 4GB cards? and still increase results?
-
The new version of the miner will be released soon and will resolve the issues. EDIT: v0.1 is released
Very nice work !!!
2K cpm with r280X
but could you try to put it on Ypool or 1GH please :))
-
[...]
oh... i tested the new software on my HD6990 - only ~800 cpm compared to the higher rate at pts.1gh.com ~1280 cpm / on one GPU of the card
[...]
i know that the kernels aren't fast on 5000 and 6000 series gpu cards. the used memory access pattern makes no sense for these gpus. the results are on one gpu of the card, or?
[...]
so if 1 instance takes 1200MB, two takes 2400MB, are you able to run three for 3600MB on your 4GB cards? and still increase results?
i haven't tried this yet. but i do not believe this will result in any gains. running 2 instances is a possibility to increase cpm for some users until the kernels are further opimized
-
need help :o :o
- with my i7 and R280x its faboulous 2K cpm :D
- but on my I5 with ATI HD7950 dont work :(
(http://imageshack.com/a/img20/7307/s3me.png)
-
Your miner is really fast. Please support nvidia cards and i will my nvidia`s to the pool.
-
[...]
oh... i tested the new software on my HD6990 - only ~800 cpm compared to the higher rate at pts.1gh.com ~1280 cpm / on one GPU of the card
[...]
i know that the kernels aren't fast on 5000 and 6000 series gpu cards. the used memory access pattern makes no sense for these gpus. the results are on one gpu of the card, or?
yeah, results are for one gpu of the two at the HD6990
-
The new version of the miner will be released soon and will resolve the issues. EDIT: v0.1 is released
Very nice work !!!
2K cpm with r280X
but could you try to put it on Ypool or 1GH please :))
I would love to see this for 1GH, the paranoid side of me says no to Ypool until other pools level things out heh...
so far this seems to be running well, only encountered a problem when I hit a stale share after several hours, looks like the program froze, or maybe the screen stopped outputting, not really sure as I did the close window open new window fix... I should have captured the screen and checked with GPU-Z if things were still running...
1035 cpm on ASUS R9270-DC2OC-2GD5 (non-X version) estimating 100 watts used for the card it seems...
-
need help :o :o
- with my i7 and R280x its faboulous 2K cpm :D
- but on my I5 with ATI HD7950 dont work :(
it seems that your system has an intel opencl driver installed because it says there are two opencl platforms... perhaps that is the same problem other people encountered and you should try their workaround. that shouldn't be a bug of my miner if the workaround works.
UPDATE which catalyst version is installed on your system?
perhaps windows loads the intel opencl dynamic library instead of the AMD library. Maybe those libraries aren't compatible even for opencl 1.1 or 1.2.
-
Here are some numbers of my cards:
HD 7850: 930 cpm
HD 7950: 1815 cpm
R9 270: 1115 cpm
R9 270X: 1265 cpm
R9 290X: 2535 cpm
-
UPDATE which catalyst version is installed on your system?
perhaps windows loads the intel opencl dynamic library instead of the AMD library. Maybe those libraries aren't compatible even for opencl 1.1 or 1.2.
Old version....
ok i'm trying to update it now !
(http://imageshack.com/a/img801/9684/h59c.png)
-
UPDATE which catalyst version is installed on your system?
perhaps windows loads the intel opencl dynamic library instead of the AMD library. Maybe those libraries aren't compatible even for opencl 1.1 or 1.2.
gratz !!
its working now !! with this update driver ATI cata !
THX ! :)
1650 cpm with HD 7950
(http://imageshack.com/a/img41/9216/26kl.png)
-
(http://ods.ods.net/clpts-1.jpg)
(http://ods.ods.net/clpts-2.jpg)
its been running for several hours... but now I seem to be running into a new problem... when it comes time to mine for the author, it seems to do that just fine for the 35 seconds... but when it comes time to switch back to mining for the user, it seems to be having trouble trying to get back to working...
in picture one you can see its going back to mining for user for 30min... at first it seems to be working but then suddenly dies... and in picture two you can see the problem continues for quite some time and it was not improving, so I finally killed it, restarted it, and its working without an issue again... this is the same problem I ran into before... it seems to have an issue switching between the mining for author and mining for user again...
my gpu's seem to be working at 99% as normal, but you can see the shares per minute absolutely drop down to nothing... and this goes on for quite some time, I simply could only take so many pictures in scroll back heh...
Windows 8.1
clpts v0.1 win x86-64
-
same problem to me...
you cant let it run without having a look after it - it seems to be too "fresh"
the switch back from mining for the developer to mining for the user does not work properly
W7-64-bit-prof.
clpts v0.1 win x86-64
-
@Darkbane: This is really strange. the miner even recognizes a dead tcp connection ("watchdog timer triggered") and tries to reconnect but no block arrives from the server. after that a corrupted block is received. the sharetarged should be 03ffff....ffffbeafde4d. I guess this is related to Windows 8.1. Do you have access to Windows 7 (this works) or Windows 8?
EDIT other users with Win7 also report this problem. I take a look at it. The linux version works without problems for me.
-
I can't conect beeeeeeeg or begggggg，howerver.Can you let's me choose pool?
-
@Darkbane: This is really strange. the miner even recognizes a dead tcp connection ("watchdog timer triggered") and tries to reconnect but no block arrives from the server. after that a corrupted block is received. the sharetarged should be 03ffff....ffffbeafde4d. I guess this is related to Windows 8.1. Do you have access to Windows 7 (this works) or Windows 8?
EDIT other users with Win7 also report this problem. I take a look at it. The linux version works without problems for me.
Yeah the weird part is, clearly its worked many many times since I have run this for almost 8 hours, but several times its done this exact same thing... I mean I'm assuming its worked many times, I think it said every 30-60min it will mine for the author? so its worked 20-40 times but every so often randomly it just hangs... the weird part is its still pegging the video card at 99% even though its just trying to reconnect?
so Ubuntu is good? I've been thinking about taking a stab at it on a bootable usb drive, but I just don't know an ubuntu for dummies guide that really teaches me what things mean along the way, versus "type this"...
I understand this is v0.1 so I'm certain you've got pages of things you plan to do already heh... it's just impressive the performance gain over other miners with the same GPU... being able to leave it unattended for days would put it well beyond the others.
-
I updated the miner to version 0.1.1, which should fix with the "doing no work" bug in Windows.
@darkbane: the miner used a corrupted block with a wrong share target. therefore it is very likely that the miner will find zero shares in a reasonable time because it has a very difficult share target. it looked like as some buffers got corrupted. most likely windows missed some resources because i used many asynchronous events but v0.1.1 implements better code.
-
I updated the miner to version 0.1.1, which should fix with the "doing no work" bug in Windows.
Okay got it up and humming along... saw the v0.1.1 in the header, I appreciate that!
I'll check back on it in a few hours and let it run overnight just to keep pressing it.
-
I updated the miner to version 0.1.1, which should fix with the "doing no work" bug in Windows.
THX for the CHINESE WALL!Please let me choose what's pool I used
D:\挖矿\clpts-v0.1_win_x86-64>clpts_x86-64 PsYGu95S3PwoPcUyNrXrkHjm2G8DuTZ5Zx 0
1
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.1.1
** by NaN - based on ptsminer.
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmai
l.com
** PTS: PtLx9kDLTXtR1ae3u7naXLPeGjjHZ1PGoR
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 2 (deviceID 0): Tahiti
Name of device #2 / 2 (deviceID 1): Tahiti
spawning 2 worker thread(s)
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
[WORKER1] Hello, World!
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 160)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 174)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 167)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 221)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 284)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 291)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
could not resolve host. sleep 10 seconds until retry
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 160)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 174)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 167)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 221)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 284)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 291)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
[STATS] 2014-[MASTER] Jan-2014-29 Jan-09:29 00:09:59 | 000.00:59 | work received
| sharetarget: c/m | 03ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffb
eefde4d
0.00 sh/m | VL: 0 (0.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[STATS] 2014-Jan-29 09:01:07 | 0.00 c/m | 0.00 sh/m | VL: 0 (0.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00
%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[STATS] 2014-Jan-29 09:01:17 | 0.00 c/m | 0.00 sh/m | VL: 0 (0.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00
%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[STATS] 2014-Jan-29 09:01:27 | 0.00 c/m | 0.00 sh/m | VL: 0 (0.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00
%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
-
which catalyst version are you using?
-
which catalyst version are you using?
13-1_vista_win7_win8_64_dd_ccc_whql
and
SDK 12.9
-
which catalyst version are you using?
13-1_vista_win7_win8_64_dd_ccc_whql
and
SDK 12.9
Another user wrote that catalyst 13.1 does not work. same problem. please update the driver
-
which catalyst version are you using?
13-1_vista_win7_win8_64_dd_ccc_whql
and
SDK 12.9
Another user wrote that catalyst 13.1 does not work. same problem. please update the driver
try to 13.12,it's OK
[WORKER1] share found: 47542446 <-> 23048227 #278 (18510) @ 1390964351
[STATS] 2014-Jan-29 10:03:46 | 3278.12 c/m | 49.06 sh/m | VL: 216 (99.08%)
2 (0.92%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER1] share found: 14390109 <-> 59640650 #279 (18584) @ 1390964373
[WORKER0] share found: 56117766 <-> 53405478 #280 (18766) @ 1390964440
[WORKER0] share found: 56011260 <-> 12477005 #281 (18886) @ 1390964474
[WORKER0] share found: 23711366 <-> 53320897 #282 (19050) @ 1390964530
[WORKER0] share found: 53238056 <-> 9688937 #283 (19080) @ 1390964538
[WORKER0] share found: 38155706 <-> 42210330 #284 (19142) @ 1390964558
[WORKER1] share found: 43616931 <-> 46186387 #285 (19162) @ 1390964539
[STATS] 2014-Jan-29 10:03:56 | 3284.91 c/m | 48.86 sh/m | VL: 222 (99.11%)
2 (0.89%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER1] share found: 57056053 <-> 30333989 #286 (19180) @ 1390964543
[WORKER0] share found: 37509216 <-> 161646 #287 (19266) @ 1390964588
[WORKER1] share found: 60494598 <-> 61284186 #288 (19660) @ 1390964679
[WORKER1] share found: 19190590 <-> 11028309 #289 (19726) @ 1390964693
[WORKER0] share found: 46305233 <-> 40334684 #290 (19768) @ 1390964730
[STATS] 2014-Jan-29 10:04:06 | 3294.67 c/m | 48.33 sh/m | VL: 227 (99.13%)
2 (0.87%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER0] share found: 5031941 <-> 34767294 #291 (19774) @ 1390964732
[WORKER1] share found: 63154609 <-> 39599691 #292 (19932) @ 1390964747
[WORKER1] share found: 18337791 <-> 59469530 #293 (19978) @ 1390964759
[WORKER0] share found: 56476755 <-> 37374914 #294 (20228) @ 1390964844
[WORKER0] share found: 35894059 <-> 10143253 #295 (20312) @ 1390964868
-
There is a problem, only 13.1 driver can support more than 4 cards, means you can not update the driver supports more graphics, whether you can upgrade only OPCL it?
-
There is a problem, only 13.1 driver can support more than 4 cards, means you can not update the driver supports more graphics, whether you can upgrade only OPCL it?
I have no idea. If this is possible it is most likely complicated. why isn't AMD able to support more gpus with current drivers? do you know whether 4 gpus work with the linux drivers?
-
There is a problem, only 13.1 driver can support more than 4 cards, means you can not update the driver supports more graphics, whether you can upgrade only OPCL it?
I have no idea. If this is possible it is most likely complicated. why isn't AMD able to support more gpus with current drivers? do you know whether 4 gpus work with the linux drivers?
I do not know to use LINUX, has been using WIN7 64. I do not know why, after 13.1 AMD drivers do not support more than 400 cards, including 270 270X drivers are needed in 13.1 in 7870 to support the mandatory installation of 6 cards. You see it can support 13.1 driver?
-
[WORKER1] share found: 39302792 <-> 23252414 #2677 (172270) @ 1390965621
[WORKER1] share found: 19725197 <-> 35205832 #2678 (172328) @ 1390965637
[WORKER1] share found: 15219440 <-> 6413293 #2679 (172504) @ 1390965695
[WORKER0] share found: 2669651 <-> 56902601 #2680 (172504) @ 1390965710
[WORKER0] share found: 65841309 <-> 26210212 #2681 (172534) @ 1390965724
[WORKER0] share found: 5100596 <-> 17821504 #2682 (172588) @ 1390965740
[STATS] 2014-Jan-29 10:47:26 | 3499.38 c/m | 54.36 sh/m | VL: 2584 (99.81%)
5 (0.19%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER0] share found: 19313389 <-> 24836122 #2683 (172672) @ 1390965762
[WORKER0] share found: 31654685 <-> 65801234 #2684 (172750) @ 1390965782
[WORKER1] share found: 41656377 <-> 30877221 #2685 (172786) @ 1390965775
[WORKER0] share found: 23386461 <-> 49631312 #2686 (172886) @ 1390965816
[WORKER0] share found: 35802758 <-> 22282221 #2687 (172918) @ 1390965828
[WORKER0] share found: 38276454 <-> 35582920 #2688 (172988) @ 1390965850
[WORKER1] share found: 7672694 <-> 17473679 #2689 (173104) @ 1390965869
[WORKER0] share found: 65527925 <-> 45901985 #2690 (173152) @ 1390965894
[WORKER1] share found: 25582390 <-> 22565606 #2691 (173170) @ 1390965881
[WORKER1] share found: 18761792 <-> 26609064 #2692 (173192) @ 1390965887
[WORKER0] share found: 4323306 <-> 55538948 #2693 (173254) @ 1390965922
[STATS] 2014-Jan-29 10:47:36 | 3500.53 c/m | 54.40 sh/m | VL: 2594 (99.81%)
5 (0.19%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER0] share found: 45773293 <-> 48556919 #2694 (173354) @ 1390965952
[WORKER1] share found: 16444562 <-> 16153991 #2695 (173510) @ 1390965969
[WORKER1] share found: 362427 <-> 10585721 #2696 (173524) @ 1390965973
NOW.7950 work on 1750 CPM of one
-
with this version, after 2hours run, I still got
6 (0.42%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
failed to connect (system:10061). sleep 10 seconds until retry
[STATS] 2014-Jan-29 21:22:49 | 500.43 c/m | 0.02 sh/m | VL: 6223 (99.58%), RJ: 2
6 (0.42%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
failed to connect (system:10061). sleep 10 seconds until retry
[STATS] 2014-Jan-29 21:22:59 | 499.08 c/m | 0.02 sh/m | VL: 6223 (99.58%), RJ: 2
6 (0.42%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[STATS] 2014-Jan-29 21:23:09 | 497.74 c/m | 0.02 sh/m | VL: 6223 (99.58%), RJ: 2
6 (0.42%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
failed to connect (system:10061). sleep 10 seconds until retry
[STATS] 2014-Jan-29 21:23:19 | 496.41 c/m | 0.02 sh/m | VL: 6223 (99.58%), RJ: 2
6 (0.42%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
failed to connect (system:10061). sleep 10 seconds until retry
It retry repeatedly, restart miner can work again
I updated the miner to version 0.1.1, which should fix with the "doing no work" bug in Windows.
@darkbane: the miner used a corrupted block with a wrong share target. therefore it is very likely that the miner will find zero shares in a reasonable time because it has a very difficult share target. it looked like as some buffers got corrupted. most likely windows missed some resources because i used many asynchronous events but v0.1.1 implements better code.
-
This means that the miner isn't able to connect to the server. That's a different problem. It could be a boost related problem, i.e. boost::asio::connect somehow fails. Did your IP change before that happens? I'm trying to fix it
UPDATE newly released version v0.1.2 should fix it.
-
No, ip is fixed. I restart miner can connect.
This means that the miner isn't able to connect to the server. That's a different problem. It could be a boost related problem, i.e. boost::asio::connect somehow fails. Did your IP change before that happens? I'm trying to fix it
-
UPDATE newly released version v0.1.2 should fix it.
hello :)
what about 1Gh or Ypool version ? :)
Thx ^^
-
working on it. hopefully I can release it tomorrow.
-
This means that the miner isn't able to connect to the server. That's a different problem. It could be a boost related problem, i.e. boost::asio::connect somehow fails. Did your IP change before that happens? I'm trying to fix it
UPDATE newly released version v0.1.2 should fix it.
Okay ran v0.1.1 for windows the past 12 hours straight and it seems to still be running solid no issues... I'll get the new version and fire it up...
windows 8.1 64bit
AMD driver 13.251.0.0
-
working on it. hopefully I can release it tomorrow.
let's dream us :)
-
Nvidia cards support will be greatly appreciated. ;)
Please make it happened!
-
Nvidia cards support will be greatly appreciated. ;)
Please make it happened!
Most of the PTS miners are for nVidia Cards. Check out PTSGPUz or cudaptsminer.
-
Nvidia cards support will be greatly appreciated. ;)
Please make it happened!
Most of the PTS miners are for nVidia Cards. Check out PTSGPUz or cudaptsminer.
Indeed! But they are not as fast as Nan`s miner.
-
what about 1Gh or Ypool version ? :)
Thx ^^
Plus 1 for 1Gh version. With other PTS miners my 7990 did 2000 cpm which is not bad, almost as good as a 6990. With your miner it does 3500 cpm with only 8% more power usage - that's pretty awesome coding.
-
the new version v0.2 does not work / w7-64-prof
shown at windows:
"Problemsignatur:
Problemereignisname: APPCRASH
Anwendungsname: clpts_x86-64.exe
Anwendungsversion: 0.0.0.0
Anwendungszeitstempel: 52ea5049
Fehlermodulname: msvcrt.dll
Fehlermodulversion: 7.0.7601.17744
Fehlermodulzeitstempel: 4eeb033f
Ausnahmecode: c0000005
Ausnahmeoffset: 0000000000009498
Betriebsystemversion: 6.1.7601.2.1.0.256.48
Gebietsschema-ID: 1031
Zusatzinformation 1: 3c19
Zusatzinformation 2: 3c19e81f7ecf4f5eabb06a927010ffd2
Zusatzinformation 3: 81fd
Zusatzinformation 4: 81fd335e05e14c51899865f794ef6750"
-
the new version v0.2 does not work / w7-64-prof
[...]
what is the driver version and your GPU? EDIT did you invoke the program with the right flags?
-
the new version v0.2 does not work / w7-64-prof
[...]
what is the driver version and your GPU?
Catalyst 13.12 + 3 x R9 290X
Edit: "right flags" - don't know what that is
i started a batch-file - the first lines in the cmd are shown up to the donation-thing - no pool-connection so far i saw
-
well, please read the README and how to use the program
you want to make jokes with me...
so i did it how you described it in your file - but i do not see the difference with starting cmd.exe via batch-file - i did it with all your versions before
and what is the result of this very manual session - this tipping-lines and "cd"-commands are really...
you know what i want to say
crash of the miner - it comes up to the donation-line in the cmd.exe
Problemsignatur:
Problemereignisname: APPCRASH
Anwendungsname: clpts_x86-64.exe
Anwendungsversion: 0.0.0.0
Anwendungszeitstempel: 52ea5049
Fehlermodulname: msvcrt.dll
Fehlermodulversion: 7.0.7601.17744
Fehlermodulzeitstempel: 4eeb033f
Ausnahmecode: c0000005
Ausnahmeoffset: 0000000000009498
Betriebsystemversion: 6.1.7601.2.1.0.256.48
Gebietsschema-ID: 1031
Zusatzinformation 1: 3c19
Zusatzinformation 2: 3c19e81f7ecf4f5eabb06a927010ffd2
Zusatzinformation 3: 81fd
Zusatzinformation 4: 81fd335e05e14c51899865f794ef6750
-
please post your bat file. otherwise i can't help you.
-
please post your bat file. otherwise i can't help you.
clpts_x86-64 -p Schwede65.1 -p bc -t 0
Edit: it has to be "-u Schwede65.1"?
Edit2: it is written to do so in someones "README"-file ;)
-
oh, shit... typo. the user flag is -u... should be
clpts_x86-64 -u Schwede65.1 -p bc -t 0
I'm sorry. EDIT The README is now fixed.
-
oh, shit... typo. the user flag is -u... should be
clpts_x86-64 -u Schwede65.1 -p bc -t 0
I'm sorry.
now it works fine :)
-
okay 24 hours non-stop on v0.1.2 still going strong
windows 8.1 64bit
amd driver 13.251.0.0
R9270-DC2OC-2GD5 (four not in crossfire)
96.75 watts per card consumed @50% fan speed
1206MB dedicated memory consumed per card
stock card settings (comes slightly overclocked)
4231.56 CPM 65.56 SPM
VL 99.51% RJ 0.47% ST 0.02%
(guess I should mention this is @beeeeer.org)
-
Thanks for your power measurement. my measurements indicate that a r9 290@1025mhz draws about 200W at wall and makes about 2300 cpm.
-
Thanks for your power measurement. my measurements indicate that a r9 290@1025mhz draws about 200W at wall and makes about 2300 cpm.
I'm lucky enough to have gotten a CP1500PFCLCD when it came out, the digital display makes it real nice to let a system warm up to get a base reading, and then one by one you can add the cards or start using them, there will always be that few percent margin of error from the system but it's pretty darn close once you wait for temperature and fan speed to settle...
-
UPDATE 10: version v0.2 of the miner is released, which supports the pool on ypool.net. If you want to connect to beeeeer.org you should use v.0.1.2. The miner does NOT support the 1GH-pool yet because the pool does not implement the latest xpt-protocol but 1GH-pool support is still planned. EDIT There was a typo in the README. The usage of v0.2 is <exe-name> -u <username>.<worker> -p <pass> -t <GPU DeviceID list>
THX A LOT :)))
-
Thanks a lots! :) Please, support nvidia cards too!!! :'(
-
on ypool :v0.2
- R280X = 2150 cpm
- hd7950 = 1150 cpm ( version v0.1.2 = 1450 cpm on beer why?? )
nice work anyway !
-
how long did you run the 7950? 1450 cpm sounds a lot more reasonable than 1150 cpm. the opencl kernels of version v0.2 and v0.1.2 are the same.
-
270X shows 99% GPU Load (930/1500) @ 50% Fan Speed but when I monitor the 290X I see 930 Core and Memory changes from 1500 to 300 every 10-15 seconds and the GPU load shows as 0% (while putting out 2300-2400c/m) - go figure. The 290X shows between 90W and 143W.
-
270X shows 99% GPU Load (930/1500) @ 50% Fan Speed but when I monitor the 290X I see 930 Core and Memory changes from 1500 to 300 every 10-15 seconds and the GPU load shows as 0% (while putting out 2300-2400c/m) - go figure. The 290X shows between 90W and 143W.
It sounds like your 290x is throttling. It may be overheating and doing so to prevent damage.
-
270X shows 99% GPU Load (930/1500) @ 50% Fan Speed but when I monitor the 290X I see 930 Core and Memory changes from 1500 to 300 every 10-15 seconds and the GPU load shows as 0% (while putting out 2300-2400c/m) - go figure. The 290X shows between 90W and 143W.
It sounds like your 290x is throttling. It may be overheating and doing so to prevent damage.
steady 100% usage at 66C in cgminer on the 290@901kh/sec - not sure why PTS program bounces but I know i get tons of c/m from it.
-
how long did you run the 7950? 1450 cpm sounds a lot more reasonable than 1150 cpm. the opencl kernels of version v0.2 and v0.1.2 are the same.
after 15mn each client: same card of course HD 7950
(http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/800x600q90/853/2lbp.png)
and
(http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/800x600q90/580/0yj3.png)
-
how long did you run the 7950? 1450 cpm sounds a lot more reasonable than 1150 cpm. the opencl kernels of version v0.2 and v0.1.2 are the same.
after 15mn each client: same card of course HD 7950
(http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/800x600q90/853/2lbp.png)
and
(http://imagizer.imageshack.us/v2/800x600q90/580/0yj3.png)
I used 0.2 and 0.12,7950 too.the same speed,1750 CPM each one
-
270X shows 99% GPU Load (930/1500) @ 50% Fan Speed but when I monitor the 290X I see 930 Core and Memory changes from 1500 to 300 every 10-15 seconds and the GPU load shows as 0% (while putting out 2300-2400c/m) - go figure. The 290X shows between 90W and 143W.
crazy idea, but is it possible your 290x is working so quick, you're simply running out of work to do... which might explain why it has a burst and then backs down as the work is done... on other coins I've been able to increase packet difficulty in the pools, but I've never seen any options in any of these pts pools to increase or decrease difficulty... could it be as simple as you ran out of work for that brief moment heh... I mean none of the miners seem to take full advantage of the memory cards have (it just seems to be a minimum required to start), in other miners we're able to set the threads and intensity to fine tune that sort of thing... some of the pts cpu miners seem to have the ability to increase memory use which in turn boosts performance a little... we could just be leaving a lot on the table in this early stage of gpu mining for it?
-
I used 0.2 and 0.12,7950 too.the same speed,1750 CPM each one
ok i found... sorry you're right :))
950cpm withruning cpu for another coin same time with full core..^^
hd7590 is back at 1500cpm now :)
nice work again ^^
-
My GPU miner uses a completely different algorithm than CPU miners and more memory is not a big advantage. The work for the GPU is produced locally until a new block comes in. Therefore the GPU should never idle. But the current kernels are executed in less than 0.05s or even faster, so there should be some noticeable CPU overhead. Additionally, the current kernels aren't 100% optimized so that the GPU is not doing any significant work for about 0.05s per round. This explains the low power usage compared to scrypt miners. Furthermore, the r9 290(X) has a different memory interface than the other GPUs. This might explain why it is better to use two threads per GPU on these GPUs.
-
My GPU miner uses a completely different algorithm than CPU miners and more memory is not a big advantage. The work for the GPU is produced locally until a new block comes in. Therefore the GPU should never idle. But the current kernels are executed in less than 0.05s or even faster, so there should be some noticeable CPU overhead. Additionally, the current kernels aren't 100% optimized so that the GPU is not doing any significant work for about 0.05s per round. This explains the low power usage compared to scrypt miners. Furthermore, the r9 290(X) has a different memory interface than the other GPUs. This might explain why it is better to use two threads per GPU on these GPUs.
it is quite amazing how much higher the cpm rate is with your work compared to other miners... and with less power! (less power is my favorite part, the fan noise is a blessing, I've actually got mine down to 30% now) would more difficult work (or larger blocks, not sure what to call it really) benefit the program or does it all end up being relatively the same with the method being used?
EDIT... sound is also a huge reason why I use the CORSAIR AX760 (the non-i version)... the fan doesn't even spin up until well after 50% load... so when I use these R9 270 cards, it never spins up in hybrid mode...
-
Share found! (Blockheight: 46648)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46648)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46648)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46648)
collisions/min: 8037.7186 Shares total: 66
Share found! (Blockheight: 46648)
collisions/min: 8043.0996 Shares total: 67
Share found! (Blockheight: 46648)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46648)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46648)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46648)
collisions/min: 8044.3011 Shares total: 71
collisions/min: 8058.8153 Shares total: 71
Share found! (Blockheight: 46648)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46648)
collisions/min: 8053.8305 Shares total: 73
Share found! (Blockheight: 46648)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46648)
Ping 504.9ms (Average 752.4)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46648)
collisions/min: 8063.3663 Shares total: 76
Share found! (Blockheight: 46648)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46648)
collisions/min: 8061.2219 Shares total: 78
four 280x.2000+CPM each one.
Platform power consumption 800 watts input power factor of 0.8, the output power about 640 watts, 40 watts to remove the platform, about 150 watts per card
-
I found a way to make the card more than 4 runs, first with the catalyst 13.12, and then extract the mandatory installation of 13.1 catalyst in driving, so you can run more than 4 cards. I do not know what needs to be updated 13.12 inside the program can run, NAN you check to see?
-
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
collisions/min: 10189.2424 Shares total: 375
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
collisions/min: 10189.2000 Shares total: 378
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
collisions/min: 10183.2178 Shares total: 382
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
collisions/min: 10188.6765 Shares total: 390
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
1020 watts 5*280X
30% FAN
gpu load 99%
temp 62°C
mem used 1124M
-
@visterln have you over-locked? I can only get 1850 cpm on my R280x
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
collisions/min: 10189.2424 Shares total: 375
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
collisions/min: 10189.2000 Shares total: 378
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
collisions/min: 10183.2178 Shares total: 382
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
collisions/min: 10188.6765 Shares total: 390
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
1020 watts 5*280X
30% FAN
gpu load 99%
temp 62°C
mem used 1124M
-
nan it is possible to run 2 threads on 1 GPU?? haity 280x??
how i can test from command line?
thanks!!!
and really good job!
-
@visterln have you over-locked? I can only get 1850 cpm on my R280x
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
collisions/min: 10189.2424 Shares total: 375
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
collisions/min: 10189.2000 Shares total: 378
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
collisions/min: 10183.2178 Shares total: 382
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
collisions/min: 10188.6765 Shares total: 390
Share found! (Blockheight: 46660)
1020 watts 5*280X
30% FAN
gpu load 99%
temp 62°C
mem used 1124M
rots he run 5X280X
:-)
you can't reach him!!! :D :D :D
-
nan it is possible to run 2 threads on 1 GPU?? haity 280x??
how i can test from command line?
thanks!!!
and really good job!
My experience with this:
i made a batch-file ".bat" on W7-64 - i started this 2 times on my R9 290X - but the summed hashrate of the two threads was ~5% lower compared to one running thread per gpu
-
nan it is possible to run 2 threads on 1 GPU?? haity 280x??
how i can test from command line?
thanks!!!
and really good job!
My experience with this:
i made a batch-file ".bat" on W7-64 - i started this 2 times on my R9 290X - but the summed hashrate of the two threads was ~5% lower compared to one running thread per gpu
ok i understand!
I thought there was a flag to run 2 threads from 1 miner application!!!
-
nan it is possible to run 2 threads on 1 GPU?? haity 280x??
how i can test from command line?
thanks!!!
and really good job!
You can try the command line parameter -t 0,0 which will spawn two threads on the first gpu. but i guess this won't be faster on a 280X than a single thread per gpu. but feel free to test
-
report bug:
HD 7950 on i5 on ypool
1500 cpm in the beginning ... and after four hours my cpm down slowly under 1K why ?
-
do you use your cpu for anything else? are you using the following version of the miner? https://www.dropbox.com/sh/1ioh00043hqbsbk/wTptW3dr22
EDIT Please post your miner settings, too
-
collisions/min: 0.0000 Shares total: 0
keep showing this on my hd7750
my .bat file:
clpts_x86-64 -u xxxxxx.PTS_1 -p x
-t 0
pause
(user name is crossed)
-
a hd7750 has not enough ram. it will not run
-
@visterln have you over-locked? I can only get 1850 cpm on my R280x
yes，1079/1500，the cgminer same
-
so we roughly know... using NaN's pts miner...
R9 270 = about 100 watt usage 1000 cpm
R9 270X = about 110 watt usage 1100 cpm
R9 280X = about 150 watt usage 1800 cpm
R9 290X = about 200 watt usage 2500 cpm
your results will vary as people change engine/memory speeds, as well as different manufacturers having different core settings with the cards they ship... your results will vary...
(edited to add the 280X)
-
so we roughly know... using NaN's pts miner...
R9 270X = about 100 watt usage 1000 cpm
R9 290X = about 200 watt usage 3000 cpm
Anyone have a watt usage on the R9 280X?
is it as simple as splitting the difference at about 150 watts and 2000cpm?
Hi there,
my rig is drawing ~ 500 Watts according to Corsair Link when shuffling 5500 c/m.
GPU: 3 x 280x
CPU: AMD Sempron 145
How do you measure Watts per GPU??
-
Hi NaN
want to mine on beeer but
still having problems with v0.1.2 (R9 270, Win64, Driver 13.12)
Vendor of platform #1 / 2: Intel(R) Corporation
error in gpuhash.h, line 131: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)
The AMD Card is not recognized.
The v0.2 Version is running perfect with 1070 cpm
any idea ?
-
Hi just want you to know that you have the fastest PTS miner . Just imagine , initially i have 7970 running at 950 cpm . But upon upgrading my catalyst driver to latest version , the rate shoots up almost twice as fast at 1760 cpm. Thank you hope you can develop merge miner (with memorycoin) as well :)
-
Hi NaN
want to mine on beeer but
still having problems with v0.1.2 (R9 270, Win64, Driver 13.12)
Vendor of platform #1 / 2: Intel(R) Corporation
error in gpuhash.h, line 131: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)
The AMD Card is not recognized.
The v0.2 Version is running perfect with 1070 cpm
any idea ?
Try updating your AMD driver, that seems to be helping most people who run into that issue... I'm running R9 270 and R9 270X together using v0.1.2 with the AMD 13.251.0.0 (12/6/2013 version) and have been running solid for 48 hours now... on windows 8 64bit for me...
-
so we roughly know... using NaN's pts miner...
R9 270X = about 100 watt usage 1000 cpm
R9 290X = about 200 watt usage 3000 cpm
Anyone have a watt usage on the R9 280X?
is it as simple as splitting the difference at about 150 watts and 2000cpm?
Hi there,
my rig is drawing ~ 500 Watts according to Corsair Link when shuffling 5500 c/m.
GPU: 3 x 280x
CPU: AMD Sempron 145
How do you measure Watts per GPU??
Well the way I do it is with a digital display on my UPS device... I start the system with no cards, get a base wattage, then I add 1 card and start using it, check the wattage... then I repeat this with 2 3 4 cards... and check to make sure the increase in-between each card is relatively the same...
alternatively if you don't want to rip your rig apart... start it up without mining... you'll get your base while the cards are in low power mode since they aren't being used... then start mining with just 1 card, take a reading, then start mining with 2 cards, take a reading, then mine with all 3 cards and take a reading... then check the wattage between each one and you can get a relatively accurate idea what its using when mining... just be sure to wait until you reach maximum operating temperature so the fan is going as fast as its going to go... should be able to see a pattern between each card...
looking at your total wattage... looks like a fair guess would probably be around 150 watts each...
-
Is there linux 32 binary compiled ?
-
Is there linux 32 binary compiled ?
No. Shall I compile one for you (I didn't compile one because my system has no installed 32bit libraries)?
-
I released a fast OpenCL PTS-miner for AMD GPUs. The performance is 2300+ c/m on a R9 290@1025mhz and about 1100c/m on a 7870, so that this seems to be the fastest released miner. Binaries are available for Windows and 64bit-Linux.
DOWNLOAD v0.1.2: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/d5qvec5kxlug1bm/FR3Y_78Eag connects to the beeeeer.org pool, which has 2.5% pool fees. The developer fees for this version are 7/367 ~ 1.9%.
DOWNLOAD v0.2: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/1ioh00043hqbsbk/wTptW3dr22 connects to the ypool.net pool, which has 5% pool fees. The developer fees for this version are 2.5% to make smaller pools more attractive. The developer fees are automatically transferred by ypool.net to the developer so the user's miner does not need to reconnect to support the developer.
UPDATE 10: version v0.2 of the miner is released, which supports the pool on ypool.net. If you want to connect to beeeeer.org you should use v.0.1.2. The miner does NOT support the 1GH-pool yet because the pool does not implement the latest xpt-protocol but 1GH-pool support is still planned. EDIT There was a typo in the README. The usage of v0.2 is <exe-name> -u <username>.<worker> -p <pass> -t <GPU DeviceID list>
known issues: The miner does not run if the installed Catalyst driver is too old. Multi-GPU support works for most users but sometimes the miner won't work if there are different cards installed. Then you have to run an instance of the miner on each card. The miner is not optimized to run on 5000 and 6000 series GPUs and needs about 1.2GB free GPU RAM.
NOTE 1: When you post errors I appreciate some information about the operating system (Windows or Linux / 32bit or 64bit is sufficient) and the used Catalyst driver. Furthermore you should suppress the section between the stars of the output of the miner excluding the miner version (at the moment it hasn't any relevance but it will become important in the future).
NOTE 2: Please make sure that you are not using an outdated Catalyst version and read the README.
2300+ c/m on a R9 290@1025mhz ? :o
My 290 run @1025/1500 only 2060c/m .....what's your 290's memory frequency ?
-
Anyone try this with a 7990?
ANyway why are AMD guys mining PTS, does it not make more sense to mine doge or something? Or is PTS actually turning you a higher profit?
-
270X shows 99% GPU Load (930/1500) @ 50% Fan Speed but when I monitor the 290X I see 930 Core and Memory changes from 1500 to 300 every 10-15 seconds and the GPU load shows as 0% (while putting out 2300-2400c/m) - go figure. The 290X shows between 90W and 143W.
Same problem here，my 290's memory frequency changes from 1500 to 300 every 10-15 seconds too while 7950 runs solid @1080/1550 :o
-
Same problem here，my 290's memory frequency changes from 1500 to 300 every 10-15 seconds too while 7950 runs solid @1080/1550 :o
The 7000 series gpus and the R9 290(X) have completely different memory interfaces and my kernels do not need all of the available bandwidth.
2300+ c/m on a R9 290@1025mhz ? :o
My 290 run @1025/1500 only 2060c/m .....what's your 290's memory frequency ?
I'm using two threads per gpu and there is no running Xserver. the memory frequency is 1250 mhz (the defaults) and the gpu is at 1025mhz
-
Same problem here，my 290's memory frequency changes from 1500 to 300 every 10-15 seconds too while 7950 runs solid @1080/1550 :o
The 7000 series gpus and the R9 290(X) have completely different memory interfaces and my kernels do not need all of the available bandwidth.
2300+ c/m on a R9 290@1025mhz ? :o
My 290 run @1025/1500 only 2060c/m .....what's your 290's memory frequency ?
I'm using two threads per gpu and there is no running Xserver. the memory frequency is 1250 mhz (the defaults) and the gpu is at 1025mhz
push my 290 to 1100/1250 and get 2300 c/m now, you are on linux or windows?
-
push my 290 to 1100/1250 and get 2300 c/m now, you are on linux or windows?
Linux. I doubt that your R9 290 actually runs at 1100mhz or did you flash the card's firmware?
-
push my 290 to 1100/1250 and get 2300 c/m now, you are on linux or windows?
Linux. I doubt that your R9 290 actually runs at 1100mhz or did you flash the card's firmware?
i use msi afterburner to oc and use gpuz to check the real frequency it shows the core runs at 1100
-
1gh now accept yam cpu miner.
mine = xpt2h://YOUR-PTS-ADDRESS:x@ptspool.1gh.com:18120:18121:18122:18123/pts
can we use ypool miner for 1gh? will be easy add 1gh support too?
-
push my 290 to 1100/1250 and get 2300 c/m now, you are on linux or windows?
Linux. I doubt that your R9 290 actually runs at 1100mhz or did you flash the card's firmware?
i use msi afterburner to oc and use gpuz to check the real frequency it shows the core runs at 1100
yeah, my 290X makes 2637 cpm / 1100 GPU / 1475 RAM
OC with afterburner
very good software: NaN :)
-
mining 35s for author... I hope this actually lands on the found blocks once in a while heh... so what does it do anyhow, just switch the user address on the beeeeer.org pool and then convert back for the 30min? looks like today has been a good day so far over there... been running v0.1.2 for I think 48 hours straight now without any issues...
whats on the to-do list for your next version?
-
New AMD driver 14.1 beta1.6 gives ~ 4150 cpm @ 2x 280x !!!
Some "new" warnings appearing..
-
mining 35s for author... I hope this actually lands on the found blocks once in a while heh... so what does it do anyhow, just switch the user address on the beeeeer.org pool and then convert back for the 30min? looks like today has been a good day so far over there... been running v0.1.2 for I think 48 hours straight now without any issues...
whats on the to-do list for your next version?
The miner simply switches the payout-addresses so shares are send 35s to my address on beeeeer.org and 30min to the user's address. The shares found during the first minute after startup are send to the user.
-
New AMD driver 14.1 beta1.6 gives ~ 4150 cpm @ 2x 280x !!!
Some "new" warnings appearing..
what were you getting with the clpts miner before updating the driver?
-
It is possible to add support GPU Nvidia?
-
New AMD driver 14.1 beta1.6 gives ~ 4150 cpm @ 2x 280x !!!
Some "new" warnings appearing..
what were you getting with the clpts miner before updating the driver?
before update ~4050 cpm
-
New AMD driver 14.1 beta1.6 gives ~ 4150 cpm @ 2x 280x !!!
Some "new" warnings appearing..
what were you getting with the clpts miner before updating the driver?
before update ~4050 cpm
my experience with this 14.1 beta 1.6:
system with 3 x 290X: updated from 13.12 to 14.1 beta
the first gpu runs fine
BUT the second and third gpu only with 25 % of their cpm before
i will keep my hands away from this beta...
-
what is with your software for 1GH-pool - is there really a problem with their protocol?
why not combine the beeeeer-pool-code with the ypool-code - to have an extra-fee like you have on beeeeer-pool and the mining-protocol of ypool?
a non-coder is speaking here ;)
-
Hi,my 3x Asus 7850 1G just run with about 700+ cpm, the problem keeps even I installed the latest graphic driver. Does anybody has the same problem with me?
-
Here are some numbers of my cards:
HD 7850: 930 cpm
HD 7950: 1815 cpm
R9 270: 1115 cpm
R9 270X: 1265 cpm
R9 290X: 2535 cpm
It's very strange that my 3x Asus 7850 could just run with about 700 cpm, even less than your one card. I tried new driver, it still doesn't work normally. Could you please help me find the solution? My English is not very good, hope you could understand me!
-
Here are some numbers of my cards:
HD 7850: 930 cpm
HD 7950: 1815 cpm
R9 270: 1115 cpm
R9 270X: 1265 cpm
R9 290X: 2535 cpm
It's very strange that my 3x Asus 7850 could just run with about 700 cpm, even less than your one card. I tried new driver, it still doesn't work normally. Could you please help me find the solution? My English is not very good, hope you could understand me!
are all three cards actually being used... you have to tell the program which gpu's to use on the command line... example...
clpts_x86-64.exe yourptsaddressheresoyougetpaid 0 1 2
the 0 1 2 tells it to use three graphics cards
0 = gpu 1
1 = gpu 2
2 = gpu 3
HOWEVER... if your video card is only 1GB, it will not work from what I understand, you need 2GB... is only one of your cards 2GB?
-
Here are some numbers of my cards:
HD 7850: 930 cpm
HD 7950: 1815 cpm
R9 270: 1115 cpm
R9 270X: 1265 cpm
R9 290X: 2535 cpm
It's very strange that my 3x Asus 7850 could just run with about 700 cpm, even less than your one card. I tried new driver, it still doesn't work normally. Could you please help me find the solution? My English is not very good, hope you could understand me!
are all three cards actually being used... you have to tell the program which gpu's to use on the command line... example...
clpts_x86-64.exe yourptsaddressheresoyougetpaid 0 1 2
the 0 1 2 tells it to use three graphics cards
0 = gpu 1
1 = gpu 2
2 = gpu 3
HOWEVER... if your video card is only 1GB, it will not work from what I understand, you need 2GB... is only one of your cards 2GB?
thx for your reply. I already added -t, doesn't help. All my 7850 are 1GB, and my 270x are 2GB. My 270x works fine, but there is something wrong with my 7850. So you mean I need 2GB 7850 to work well? And what's that for? Could you please tell me?
-
Here are some numbers of my cards:
HD 7850: 930 cpm
HD 7950: 1815 cpm
R9 270: 1115 cpm
R9 270X: 1265 cpm
R9 290X: 2535 cpm
It's very strange that my 3x Asus 7850 could just run with about 700 cpm, even less than your one card. I tried new driver, it still doesn't work normally. Could you please help me find the solution? My English is not very good, hope you could understand me!
The miner does not work well with just 1GB RAM. Under Linux it won't work at all and under Windows it is slower than cards with more than 1GB RAM but I guess 700 cpm vs. 930 cpm is not bad for 1GB RAM
EDIT: Indeed, 700 cpm with three cards is bad.
-
Here are some numbers of my cards:
HD 7850: 930 cpm
HD 7950: 1815 cpm
R9 270: 1115 cpm
R9 270X: 1265 cpm
R9 290X: 2535 cpm
It's very strange that my 3x Asus 7850 could just run with about 700 cpm, even less than your one card. I tried new driver, it still doesn't work normally. Could you please help me find the solution? My English is not very good, hope you could understand me!
The miner does not work well with just 1GB RAM. Under Linux it won't work at all and under Windows it is slower than cards with more than 1GB RAM but I guess 700 cpm vs. 930 cpm is not bad for 1GB RAM
hi Nan, so I understand now. I won't use my 7850 to mine PTS, just use 270x to mine. And 700 cpm are my 3x 7850's speed....that's awful.
-
Here are some numbers of my cards:
HD 7850: 930 cpm
HD 7950: 1815 cpm
R9 270: 1115 cpm
R9 270X: 1265 cpm
R9 290X: 2535 cpm
It's very strange that my 3x Asus 7850 could just run with about 700 cpm, even less than your one card. I tried new driver, it still doesn't work normally. Could you please help me find the solution? My English is not very good, hope you could understand me!
The miner does not work well with just 1GB RAM. Under Linux it won't work at all and under Windows it is slower than cards with more than 1GB RAM but I guess 700 cpm vs. 930 cpm is not bad for 1GB RAM
hi Nan, so I understand now. I won't use my 7850 to mine PTS, just use 270x to mine. And 700 cpm are my 3x 7850's speed....that's awful.
So you get 700 cpm TOTAL for all three 7850?
Have you tried running 3 instances, 1 for each GPU?
-
latest build getting this on launch
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Pitcairn':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 160)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 174)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 167)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 221)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 284)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 291)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Hawaii':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 160)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 174)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 167)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 221)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 284)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 291)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
works each on it's own instance - will not work as devices "0 1" but 2 separate instances works.
2332c/m on 290X
1150c/m on 270X
4 instances running fine - 2 on 290X (1900/1214) 2 on 270X (970/568)
Hi has anyone managed to solve this problem. I am having the same issue on my 6990
-
Here are some numbers of my cards:
HD 7850: 930 cpm
HD 7950: 1815 cpm
R9 270: 1115 cpm
R9 270X: 1265 cpm
R9 290X: 2535 cpm
It's very strange that my 3x Asus 7850 could just run with about 700 cpm, even less than your one card. I tried new driver, it still doesn't work normally. Could you please help me find the solution? My English is not very good, hope you could understand me!
Are you overclocking? And more to the point is Schwede65? May be it is not a like comparison. I get 780 cpm on a standard 7850.
-
Here are some numbers of my cards:
HD 7850: 930 cpm
HD 7950: 1815 cpm
R9 270: 1115 cpm
R9 270X: 1265 cpm
R9 290X: 2535 cpm
It's very strange that my 3x Asus 7850 could just run with about 700 cpm, even less than your one card. I tried new driver, it still doesn't work normally. Could you please help me find the solution? My English is not very good, hope you could understand me!
Are you overclocking? And more to the point is Schwede65? May be it is not a like comparison. I get 780 cpm on a standard 7850.
you didn't ask me directly - yeah, i'm overclocking as hell - all what the card does with msi-afterburner - not the voltage at the card
the cards are running cooler with NaN's-miner then scrypt-mining - using less energy (~70 - 75 % compared to scrypt-mining)
so - why not overclocking these little tiny cards, when they stay around 60 °C with 75 % fan-speed?
that gives more mined PTS:)
e.g. three 7850-gpu / 1150 core / 1400 memory (they came as a overclocked version 1000/1225/2GB)
1023 cpm + 1026 cpm + 1029 cpm
-
yeah, my 290X makes 2637 cpm / 1100 GPU / 1475 RAM
OC with afterburner
very good software: NaN :)
oh - i have some new numbers with my 290X:
1165 core / 1475 memory / 210 watt / 58 °C / watercooled
gives marvelous 2784 cpm
-
yeah, my 290X makes 2637 cpm / 1100 GPU / 1475 RAM
OC with afterburner
very good software: NaN :)
oh - i have some new numbers with my 290X:
1165 core / 1475 memory / 210 watt / 58 °C / watercooled
gives marvelous 2784 cpm
Good overclock you have there, I have a couple 290X which I will try to get to run at 2700 cpm on air. It should be doable, but I foresee temps >70.
-
my card is HIS 7950. i can run at 1800 CPM. but my sh/m just 6~8.
when i run the first time it reach ~25sh/m but after 1-2 day it fall to 6-8. CPM don't change.
i use V 0.1.2D:\protoshare>clpts PqQSWV1CqDRay8frPVB3sWWmMMqQfBEKMT 0
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.1.2
** by NaN - based on ptsminer.
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmai
l.com
** PTS: PtLx9kDLTXtR1ae3u7naXLPeGjjHZ1PGoR
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 4 (deviceID 0): Tahiti
Name of device #2 / 4 (deviceID 1): Tahiti
Name of device #3 / 4 (deviceID 2): Tahiti
Name of device #4 / 4 (deviceID 3): Tahiti
spawning 1 worker thread(s)
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
[MASTER] 2014-Feb-05 01:18:07 | work received | sharetarget: 00fffffffffffffffff
fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffbeefde4d
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 160)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 174)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 167)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 221)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 284)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 291)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
[WORKER0] share found: 28426756 <-> 24746430 #1 (32) @ 1391537896
[STATS] 2014-Feb-05 01:18:17 | 1596.00 c/m | 6.00 sh/m | VL: 1 (100.00%), RJ: 0
(0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER0] share found: 50526446 <-> 64182950 #2 (448) @ 1391538016
[STATS] 2014-Feb-05 01:18:27 | 1734.00 c/m | 6.00 sh/m | VL: 2 (100.00%), RJ: 0
(0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[STATS] 2014-Feb-05 01:18:37 | 1748.00 c/m | 4.00 sh/m | VL: 2 (100.00%), RJ: 0
(0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER0] share found: 49151517 <-> 21210907 #3 (914) @ 1391538151
[STATS] 2014-Feb-05 01:18:47 | 1740.00 c/m | 4.50 sh/m | VL: 3 (100.00%), RJ: 0
(0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER0] share found: 47183015 <-> 12629281 #4 (1184) @ 1391538235
[WORKER0] share found: 67043267 <-> 2054009 #5 (1216) @ 1391538243
[WORKER0] share found: 30453882 <-> 4956445 #6 (1394) @ 1391538288
[WORKER0] share found: 66928955 <-> 307595 #7 (1428) @ 1391538296
[STATS] 2014-Feb-05 01:18:57 | 1800.00 c/m | 8.40 sh/m | VL: 7 (100.00%), RJ: 0
(0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER0] share found: 50718316 <-> 22417116 #8 (1640) @ 1391538357
[WORKER0] share found: 35133012 <-> 8683105 #9 (1748) @ 1391538383
[INFO] 2014-Feb-05 01:19:07 | mining 35s for developer
[STATS] 2014-Feb-05 01:19:07 | 1816.00 c/m | 9.00 sh/m | VL: 9 (100.00%), RJ: 0
(0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER0] share found: 65315683 <-> 32115183 #10 (1870) @ 1391538424
[MASTER] 2014-Feb-05 01:19:10 | work received | sharetarget: 00fffffffffffffffff
fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffbeefde4d
[STATS] 2014-Feb-05 01:19:17 | 1817.14 c/m | 8.57 sh/m | VL: 10 (100.00%), RJ: 0
(0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[STATS] 2014-Feb-05 01:19:27 | 1846.50 c/m | 7.50 sh/m | VL: 10 (100.00%), RJ: 0
(0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER0] share found: 8658198 <-> 45017443 #11 (2590) @ 1391538138
[WORKER0] share found: 2721651 <-> 27212416 #12 (2608) @ 1391538142
[STATS] 2014-Feb-05 01:19:37 | 1857.33 c/m | 8.00 sh/m | VL: 12 (100.00%), RJ: 0
(0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER0] share found: 58705291 <-> 34361908 #13 (2896) @ 1391538223
sorry about my english.
-
The share-target of beeeeer.org has changed. It is four times more difficult than before to decrease server load but this should not affect payouts: https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=234.msg34268#msg34268
-
thanks about the info.
-
Thanks for this! I tested it overnight on 4x 280X (3x ASUS DC2T and 1x Gigabyte Windforce 3X).
Total CPM: 8195 with 0.62% rejects...beautiful!
The temps are good, ranging from 68-72c on 40% fan speed in a hot room. 75% fan speed on the Gigabyte card because it has horrible cooling.
Stock clocks on all cards with the DC2T's @ 1118mV and Windforce 3X @ 1200mV because it's a bitch. Could probably squeeze out a few more CPM so I will experiment with different clock speeds when I have the time for it.
I too would like to see optimized kernels for other cards in the future, so maybe if enough people makes donations to the dev he will be able to get whatever GPU he should need for testing. What he earns from dev fee on the miner is nothing.
I really like the idea of increasing the fee on the ypool version of your miner, to encourage the use of smaller pools like beer. I honestly think increasing the fee even more would be a good idea and a good thing for the PTS network.
If the 2 versions of your miner were beer and 1gh, then that would be great! We need to spread the hash rate around.
Another suggestion is to be able to setup a backup pool, so the miner for example would switch to 1gh should beer go down.
-
yeah, possible back-up-pool would be a great thing for the future!
one position to realize is the point, that the share-/hashrate of beeeeer-pool nearly doubled from the day your miner is at the front - i know it could be more to secure the network - but we have to start and see where it goes!
-
yeah, possible back-up-pool would be a great thing for the future!
one position to realize is the point, that the share-/hashrate of beeeeer-pool nearly doubled from the day your miner is at the front - i know it could be more to secure the network - but we have to start and see where it goes!
Exactly. I think we should spread the word about GPU mining at beer (and 1gh). Especially to current scrypt miners, as mining PTS is actually more profitable than certain coins. And this is not considering the value of owning ProtoShares for the upcoming stuff!
Thus I've pointed a few rigs at PTS and the rest at DGB (DigiByte).
-
So I decided to put 4 GPUs in the same rig instead of separating them (was using cases). Mashed together an open rig with some spare wood and started mining. I wanted to squeeze out a few more CPM so I decided to overclock all of the cards. Undervolting them was to follow after that.
Here is an album showing the progress: http://imgur.com/a/eoOoi
Final result after approx. 1 hour 30 min is 8494 CPM where 3/4 cards got successfully overclocked and undervoltaged. Temps are staying awesome at 62-68C.
On my gaming rig I have 1 Sapphire Dual-X OC 280X. At 1065/1500 and stock voltage it hits 2029 CPM stable. 72C in a case is absolutely nothing to complain about! Going to try and overclock it some more later on.
(http://i.imgur.com/bRzYaT6.jpg)
-
A new version with more than 5% performance increase is released. The performance of a R9 290@1025MHz is now 2450+ cpm
EDIT: I used Catalyst 13.12 on Linux
EDIT 2: I'm using 2 threads per GPU.
-
Which Catalyst version did you use ? I have lower col/min with the latest version of the miner on R9 280X and 7950. Tried both catalyst 13.2 and 14.1 and on 14.1 have worse performance.
-
Win 7x64 the same:
v0.2: 4150 cpm - 485 s/h
v0.2.1: 3700 cpm - 415 s/h
Catalyst 14.1 beta, 2x R280
-
I downloaded the windows v0.1.3 64bit file, but it says v0.1.2 when I start the program up... and I do have a roughly 2% drop in performance for c/m and sh/m with the same system after letting it run for a couple hours... copied the v.0.1.2 files back in, and its within 0.3% where it was before after just a few minutes.
windows 8.1 64bit
amd driver 13.251.0.0
R9 270 2GB & R9 270X 4GB
-
Thanks for your feedback. I also reduced the number of workgroups, perhaps this causes the performance regression on non R9 290(X) cards. I'm working on improving the performance of non R9 290(X) cards, too.
EDIT: Could someone test this? You have to take e.g. version 0.1.2 and have to overwrite gpuhash_gcn with the gpuhash_gcn-file of v0.1.3.
-
My 280x/290/290x are all slower for with version 0.1.3/0.2.1 x64 in windows 7.
Ex: 4x 290x = 10622 0.1.2 x64 and 10351 in 0.1.3 x64
-
Thanks for your feedback. I also reduced the number of workgroups, perhaps this causes the performance regression on non R9 290(X) cards. I'm working on improving the performance of non R9 290(X) cards, too.
EDIT: Could someone test this? You have to take e.g. version 0.1.2 and have to overwrite gpuhash_gcn with the gpuhash_gcn-file of v0.1.3.
Okay I copied the one file from 0.1.3 into 0.1.2 and its been running a half hour with almost identical results as 0.1.2 stock...
4460 c/m 17.38 sh/m (0.1.2 stock)
4467 c/m 17.04 sh/m (0.1.2 one file changed) -- 30min later
4449 c/m 17.17 sh/m (0.1.2 one file changed) -- 90min later
4445 c/m 16.97 sh/m (0.1.2 one file changed) -- 120min later
4449 c/m 17.09 sh/m (0.1.2 one file changed) -- 160min later
-
1750-1790 cpm 0.2 stock
1650-1680 cpm 0.21 stock
why is donw?
1650-1680 cpm 0.21 stock
why is donw//
-
Can confirm significant drop in cpm with 0.2.1 on a 7990.
-
version 0.2.1 only works best with r9 290 cards . lets be patient because I know the developer is tweaking the miner and pretty soon he will release updates for other cards.
-
version 0.1.3 / two threads / W7-64-catalyst 13.12
on my 290X-rig: the cpm down approximately ~3-4 % compared to version 0.1.2 / two threads
-
Results using 0.1.3, over windows 7 64bit:
Over my R9-290X at 1050MHz I am down also from 2450 col/s to 2300-2350 col/s with 2 threads. Catalyst 13.2
With 3 threads I am down to 800 col/s. - > something is not ok.. probably.
I am still running over a X58 chipset... XEON overclocked at 4Ghz.
-
Your miner very fars, if you can add nvidia is very perfect, thank you.
-
Problem with 1x R9 280X after 5 Minuters I can connect with ca 1900 CPM
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 1 (deviceID 0): Tahiti
0x7d9db93de34a1e8cd71d8012de358cf214b9b0a86e0a42f71fdd05eb1e039a28
Connected to server using x.pushthrough(xpt) protocol
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdo
pencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdo
pencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdo
pencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
Connection to server lost - Reconnect in 45 seconds
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 160)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 174)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 167)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 221)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 284)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 291)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
with AMD 14.1
clpts-v0.2_win_x86-64
W7 x64
1x R9 280X 3GB
-
The warnings are a Catalyst 14.1 problem and do not occur with Catalyst 13.12. I'm not sure yet whether to ignore the warnings or not... Furthermore ypool has some problems today and is often down, perhaps dDOS.
-
The warnings are a Catalyst 14.1 problem and do not occur with Catalyst 13.12. I'm not sure yet whether to ignore the warnings or not... Furthermore ypool has some problems today and is often down, perhaps dDOS.
Ypool added Maxcoin and it getting DDOS'd hard because they are the only AMD pool.
-
I keep getting an error saying that gpuhash_gcn failed to open, when I look in my file folder these two items are only listed as "file" is that what they should be? Any ideas would be MUCH appreciated!
-
I have the same Problem with 13.12, but when It works I get ca 1700 CPM.
clpts-v0.2_win_x86-64
W7 x64
1x R9 280X 3GB
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
Connection to server lost - Reconnect in 45 seconds
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 154)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 108)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 168)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 161)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 215)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 219)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 299)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 108)
Today I test the beeeeer.org pool and let you know.
For now many Thanks
-
AMD 14.1 & AMD 13.12 BeeeerPOOL
clpts-v0.1.2_win_x86-64 (the 0.1.3 is slower with ca 200 CPM Different)
W7 x64 & 1x R9 280X 3GB
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 1 (deviceID 0): Tahiti
spawning 1 worker thread(s)
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdo
pencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdo
pencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdo
pencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
[MASTER] 2014-Feb-08 10:02:41 | work received | sharetarget: 00fffffffffffffffff
fffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffbeefde4d
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
AMD 14.1 AMD 13.12 the same
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 160)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 174)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 167)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 221)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 284)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 291)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
AMD 14.1 clpts-v0.1.2_win_x86-64
[STATS] 2014-Feb-08 10:04:50 | 1913.54 c/m | 7.38 sh/m | VL: 14 (100.00%), RJ: 0
[STATS] 2014-Feb-08 10:05:00 | 1915.71 c/m | 6.86 sh/m | VL: 14 (100.00%), RJ: 0
[STATS] 2014-Feb-08 10:05:10 | 1922.40 c/m | 7.60 sh/m | VL: 17 (100.00%), RJ: 0
[STATS] 2014-Feb-08 10:05:20 | 1905.75 c/m | 7.50 sh/m | VL: 18 (100.00%), RJ: 0
[STATS] 2014-Feb-08 10:08:30 | 1848.34 c/m | 7.54 sh/m | VL: 42 (100.00%), RJ: 0
AMD 13.12 FASTER clpts-v0.1.2_win_x86-64
[STATS] 2014-Feb-08 10:32:25 | 2008.00 c/m | 12.00 sh/m | VL: 18 (100.00%), RJ:
[STATS] 2014-Feb-08 10:32:35 | 2028.00 c/m | 12.00 sh/m | VL: 20 (100.00%), RJ:
[STATS] 2014-Feb-08 10:32:45 | 2000.73 c/m | 11.45 sh/m | VL: 21 (100.00%), RJ:
[STATS] 2014-Feb-08 10:32:55 | 2002.00 c/m | 11.00 sh/m | VL: 22 (100.00%), RJ:
-
I am getting 6830 col/m on 5x Sapphire 7950 with stock settings. That is ~1370 col/m. I have Celeron with 4Gb Ram.
Does anybody knows, how to tweak performance to get closer to 1800 col/m as some users are reporting.
I am using Ubuntu 13.1 with the latest drivers and miner v0.1.3.
-
I am getting 6830 col/m on 5x Sapphire 7950 with stock settings. That is ~1370 col/m. I have Celeron with 4Gb Ram.
Does anybody knows, how to tweak performance to get closer to 1800 col/m as some users are reporting.
I am using Ubuntu 13.1 with the latest drivers and miner v0.1.3.
Please use v0.1.2 until the next version is released. This should be fastest on your GPU. I'm working on an update with huge performance gains.
-
After changing to previous version, I am getting 7250 col/m.
I have changed memory setting on two cards to 975/1475, but there was no improvement. I am running all 5 workers in same terminal. Is there anything else I could change?
-
I released a new version with large performance improvements. The syntax of the command line options of v0.1.x has changed and one has to specify the device IDs like in v0.2.x (see README). Furthermore, the command line option -a was introduced to select an algorithm. I guess that -a 0 or -a 2 should be fastest on R9 290(X) and -a 1 or -a 3 should be best for non-R9 290(X) cards.
-
I confirm significant cpm improvements in the range of 15%-30% for HD 7950 (depending on overclocking settings)
I get about 2450 cpm with HD 7950 (clocked at 1100 1400) on 2.2. I was getting 1850 on ver 2.0.
Nice work!
-
Ubuntu 12.04
3x 7970
driver:
$ dpkg -l|grep fgl
ii fglrx-amdcccle-updates 2:13.125-0ubuntu0.0.1 Catalyst Control Center for the AMD graphics accelerators
ii fglrx-updates 2:13.125-0ubuntu0.0.1 Video driver for the AMD graphics accelerators
ii fglrx-updates-dev 2:13.125-0ubuntu0.0.1 Video driver for the AMD graphics accelerators (devel files)
$ ./clpts -u xxxx.PTS_2 -p x -t 0,1,2 -a 1
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.2 (ypool.net only)
** by NaN - based on xptMiner by jh00 (clintar's code v1.1)
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmail.com
** PTS: PtLx9kDLTXtR1ae3u7naXLPeGjjHZ1PGoR
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 3 (deviceID 0): Tahiti
Name of device #2 / 3 (deviceID 1): Tahiti
Name of device #3 / 3 (deviceID 2): Tahiti
Fee Percentage: 2.50%. To set, use "-d" flag e.g. "-d 3.5" is 3.5% donation
spawning 3 worker threads
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Internal error: Input OpenCL binary is not for the target!
Please help, thanks!
-
I have a Radeon HD7770 and am having problems running the miner. The readme file says that "5000 and 6000 HD cards work, but aren't very fast," what about 7000 series?
When I launch the miner, I get the following:
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Capeverde'
LOOP UNROOL: pragma unroll (line162)
repeated 4 more times.
Connected to server using x.pushthough(xpt) protocol
The login is configured for and unsupported algorithm.
Make sure you miner login details are correct
Any ideas or solutions?
-
I have a Radeon HD7770 and am having problems running the miner. The readme file says that "5000 and 6000 HD cards work, but aren't very fast," what about 7000 series?
When I launch the miner, I get the following:
[...]
Any ideas or solutions?
The unroll messages indicate that it is working. but you somehow used the wrong command line arguments. Could you post your command to launch the miner or your .bat-file (username and password may be masked)? But I do not think the miner will run on any 7770 card because it needs more than 1GB GPU RAM. No idea whether your cards have 2GB RAM...
-
@scrazy: Could you use v0.2.2? this is the most recent release.
-
@scrazy: Could you use v0.2.2? this is the most recent release.
Hi Nan:
The error is cause by v0.2.2 ...
Regards
-
The command is:
clpts_x86-64 -u username.workername -p password -t 0,1
My card does have 2GB RAM
-
Hi Nan:
The error is cause by v0.2.2 ...
Regards
My mistake... I forgot to change the version string. Maybe the driver is too new or too old (e.g. Catalyst 13.12 works). Do you know the version of the catalyst driver? I do not know how to interpret 2:13.125-0ubuntu0.0.1
-
The command is:
clpts_x86-64 -u username.workername -p password -t 0,1
My card does have 2GB RAM
You said that you have a 7770. Is that one card or two? With only one card you have to use
clpts_x86-64 -u username.workername -p password -t 0
-
Hi Nan:
The error is cause by v0.2.2 ...
Regards
My mistake... I forgot to change the version string. Maybe the driver is too new or too old (e.g. Catalyst 13.12 works). Do you know the version of the catalyst driver? I do not know how to interpret 2:13.125-0ubuntu0.0.1
version should be 13.25.5
-
It is one card with 2 GB RAM. I edited the .bat file to:
clpts_x86-64 -u username.workername -p password -t 0
but still having the same problem. It keeps repeating:
Connected to server using x.pushthough(xpt) protocol
The login is configured for and unsupported algorithm.
Make sure you miner login details are correct
-
version should be 13.25.5
If I am correct this should be the fglrx driver of Catalyst 12.9. This is too old
-
It is one card with 2 GB RAM. I edited the .bat file to:
clpts_x86-64 -u username.workername -p password -t 0
but still having the same problem. It keeps repeating:
Connected to server using x.pushthough(xpt) protocol
The login is configured for and unsupported algorithm.
Make sure you miner login details are correct
Is your used worker name correct, e.g. does it exist? I guess that your problem is not caused by a bug in my code.
-
i confirm huge speed gain with 2 x 280x and v0.2.2 (W7x64, C.14.1 .. -a 1):
before: 4150 cpm,
after: 5500 cpm!
:D :D :D
-
I am getting 6830 col/m on 5x Sapphire 7950 with stock settings. That is ~1370 col/m. I have Celeron with 4Gb Ram.
Does anybody knows, how to tweak performance to get closer to 1800 col/m as some users are reporting.
I am using Ubuntu 13.1 with the latest drivers and miner v0.1.3.
Please use v0.1.2 until the next version is released. This should be fastest on your GPU. I'm working on an update with huge performance gains.
v. 0.1.2 with some tweaks I managed to squeeze out 7250 col /m
v. 0.1.4 I am getting 9300col/m whoa
-
I am using clpts miner to farm pts on ypool. i found the message is shown as following:
Message during compilation of program for device"Cedar":
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 162)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 179)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 169)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 222)
Unrolled as requested!
after 10s this msg shown, the program closed by itself>
My com have 4g of Ram and Radeon hd 5400 GPU
can someone help me to figure out that?
-
R9 290 @1025Mhz
Catalyst 13.12
memory clock @????
-a @??
HOW can be 3800c/m
why i just can be 3000c/m @1025 memory:1250 -a 1 Catalyst 13.12
-
R9 290 @1025Mhz
Catalyst 13.12
memory clock @????
-a @??
HOW can be 3800c/m
why i just can be 3000c/m @1025 memory:1250 -a 1 Catalyst 13.12
-
R9 R290, Catalyst 13.12, Powertune +20%, GPU@1025MHz and RAM@1250MHz with Linux-v0.1.4 running -a 0, two threads per GPU and no other load. So far, no one was able to reproduce this in Windows but it should be possible because even a 280X easily hits more than 2700cpm. Still wondering because yesterday a user with 2 R9 290X reported only about 6100 cpm.
-
It is one card with 2 GB RAM. I edited the .bat file to:
clpts_x86-64 -u username.workername -p password -t 0
but still having the same problem. It keeps repeating:
Connected to server using x.pushthough(xpt) protocol
The login is configured for and unsupported algorithm.
Make sure you miner login details are correct
i have this VGA
VGA Sapphire Ati AMD Radeon HD 7770 Core 1000MHz Memory GDDR5 4500MHz 1GB DVI HDMI DP
and even if it works slower than others, i get 460-470 c/m with algorithm 1
with clock GPU at 1180 MHz
mem clock 1300 MHZ
power control 10%
i may say the new miner has improved 20-30 c/m but i'm not so sure
i created a bat with a code like this
<your path to the file>\clpts_x86-64.exe -o ypool.net -u user -p passw -t 0 -a 1
pause
i hope someone can find it useful
-
R9 R290, Catalyst 13.12, Powertune +20%, GPU@1025MHz and RAM@1250MHz with Linux-v0.1.4 running -a 0, two threads per GPU and no other load. So far, no one was able to reproduce this in Windows but it should be possible because even a 280X easily hits more than 2700cpm. Still wondering because yesterday a user with 2 R9 290X reported only about 6100 cpm.
I think I'm going to try out Linux and see what my 2x 290X get on it. I currently get ~6100 cpm on Windows with your new version.
Edit: Actually, I was only running 1 thread per GPU. So each was netting me about 3050 cpm. I'm going to try out two threads per GPU next.
GPU's@1040MHz and Mem@1500MHz
-
i have this VGA
VGA Sapphire Ati AMD Radeon HD 7770 Core 1000MHz Memory GDDR5 4500MHz 1GB DVI HDMI DP
[...]
RTFM! The miner needs at least 1.2 GB GPU-RAM. Your card has only one, so it is not supported. I guess that the next version will support 1GB cards.
-
I think I'm going to try out Linux and see what my 2x 290X get on it. I currently get ~6100 cpm on Windows with your new version.
Edit: Actually, I was only running 1 thread per GPU. So each was netting me about 3050 cpm. I'm going to try out two threads per GPU next.
GPU's@1040MHz and Mem@1500MHz
Please use Mem@1250MHz first because that is best normally. after that you can try Mem@1500MHz.
-
i have this VGA
VGA Sapphire Ati AMD Radeon HD 7770 Core 1000MHz Memory GDDR5 4500MHz 1GB DVI HDMI DP
[...]
RTFM! The miner needs at least 1.2 GB GPU-RAM. Your card has only one, so it is not supported. I guess that the next version will support 1GB cards.
Yeah! i know that, i wasn't complaining. Just trying to help the other user who got problem with the same card. By now i think it works really fine, much better than the previous miner i used!! Great job!
-
I released a new version with large performance improvements. The syntax of the command line options of v0.1.x has changed and one has to specify the device IDs like in v0.2.x (see README). Furthermore, the command line option -a was introduced to select an algorithm. I guess that -a 0 or -a 2 should be fastest on R9 290(X) and -a 1 or -a 3 should be best for non-R9 290(X) cards.
clpts v0.1.4 win 64bit
Windows 8.1 64bit
AMD driver 13.251.0.0
two R9 270 2GB (975mhz / 1400mhz stock)
two R9 270X 4GB (1100mhz / 1400mhz stock)
30min test for each (previous cpm was on v0.1.2)
4463 to 5590 (-a 0)
4463 to 5827 (-a 1) -- update: after 2 hours I am getting 5840, rejections increased to 1.26%
4463 to 5579 (-a 2)
4463 to 5750 (-a 3)
so looks like a solid 25% increase across the board, 30% for option 1 on the R9 270 series cards works best as mentioned... now that I've done the 30min test for each option... I'll burn in for a couple hours on option 1 and check back in a couple hours...
do you think it would be a fair test if I ran 4 copies of clpts at the same time, one on each card? with each option? (thinking I could try all 4 options at once for several hours at the same time) or is it better to run one instance and check hours later to get a real read of the program? I'm not sure how its internals function if it would make any difference...
I did notice a roughly 20 watt increase over 4 cards, seems to be using slightly more memory on the cards.
-
I have 6x 270x coming in soon and I was wondering what driver version/ windows would be best to have 6 of them running?
-
Figured I'd register to share my experience with 7850, heads up to the dev if anything :)
1.2 is running @ ~870 c/m sometimes up to 900
1.4 is maxing out at 390
Thanks for a cool piece of software !
-
R9 R290, Catalyst 13.12, Powertune +20%, GPU@1025MHz and RAM@1250MHz with Linux-v0.1.4 running -a 0, two threads per GPU and no other load. So far, no one was able to reproduce this in Windows but it should be possible because even a 280X easily hits more than 2700cpm. Still wondering because yesterday a user with 2 R9 290X reported only about 6100 cpm.
I tried two threads per GPU and still only managed ~6100 with 2x R9 290X @ 1040MHz/1500Mhz
-
7990: 3540cpm to 4480cpm = +27%, algo 1&3 about the same
7850: 780cpm to 1070cpm = +37% algo 1&3 about the same
wow!
-
How many Protoshares will you make per day with an and 290x?
-
R9 R290, Catalyst 13.12, Powertune +20%, GPU@1025MHz and RAM@1250MHz with Linux-v0.1.4 running -a 0, two threads per GPU and no other load. So far, no one was able to reproduce this in Windows but it should be possible because even a 280X easily hits more than 2700cpm. Still wondering because yesterday a user with 2 R9 290X reported only about 6100 cpm.
W7-64-catalyst13.12-clpts0.1.4 (-a 0 or 2) on a 290X / 1160 core / 1475 memory
3479 cpm
-
if I have 6x video card do I type -t 0 or -t 6 in the command line?
-
if I have 6x video card do I type -t 0 or -t 6 in the command line?
You have to type -t 0,1,2,3,4,5. Perhaps I shall introduce something like -t 0-5 in the next release...
-
if I have 6x video card do I type -t 0 or -t 6 in the command line?
You have to type -t 0,1,2,3,4,5. Perhaps I shall introduce something like -t 0-5 in the next release...
the readme file seems pretty straight forward, maybe see how well people of other languages interpret the examples clearly or not, I know sometimes things translate weird to me but are basic to those who speak it... but showing the whole command line seems to give enough to guess at to make things work. I always appreciate less options (when it comes to two ways to do the same one thing), means less things I must try to get it right.
-
To those using the new versions (where we just got a 25% or better boost for most it seems)... the miner was already leaps ahead of others, and this rockets it even further... I think it would be a nice gesture to donate an entire day or large portion to him for his efforts...
I suggest we have a mine for NaN day...
please message him for the best address to donate to if you do, as I just did 1.516 to him, he should update the readme and miner screen, just a friendly reminder here for him to update those heh ;)
-
ASUS R9-290X 1050 core.. default RAM.. 3150 col/m (+28% from 2450 col/m)! catalyst 13.251-131206a-165817C-ATI over windows 7 64 bit.. over XEON overclocked 35% (I know it does not matter.. lol).
-
Hello
is it normal ? Gigabyte R9 280X X4 get 10000-11000col/M for ver 0.2.2
Thank you
-
Figured I'd register to share my experience with 7850, heads up to the dev if anything :)
1.2 is running @ ~870 c/m sometimes up to 900
1.4 is maxing out at 390
Thanks for a cool piece of software !
Ok, going to eat my hat here. It's now up to 1080 c/m. Though it did take about 2 hours to "accelerate".
-
I can't thank you enough NaN for the incredible miner + revisions!
My current rig has 4 x MSI R9 290, running Windows 8.1 and I'm
currently seeing 11821 c/m (gpu @ 1100 MHz, mem @ 1250 MHz,
power limit @ -15%). All my 290's run at 68C to 71C with fan @ 80%.
Now the above numbers are with just a single GPU thread. When I open
another cmd window and fire up the same exact clpts as the first window
it works, though at a little less than half of the first thread. I'm currently
seeing 10400 c/m in the first thread and 4600 c/m in the second thread.
I decided to kill both threads and start them at the same time and now I
can see that both are running the same c/m which together equal the same
c/m speed as a single thread. I was guessing (hoping) that utilizing the extra
memory on the gpus would help (via more threads) but it doesn't. Just want
to throw that out and ask others to not be too harsh on me... I'm new to this
mining thing :-)
Again NaN, I can't thank you enough!!!
-
ub linux
btc@btc-desktop:~$ cd /home/desktop/pts
btc@btc-desktop:~/desktop/pts$ ./clpts PtLx9kDLTXtR1ae3u7naXLPeGjjHZ1PGoR -t 0
./clpts: error while loading shared libraries: libboost_system.so.1.55.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
what's problem about it?
-
That's a missing library search path. execute the following command: export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=./:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH. After that start the miner.
EDIT: Could you use the address Pk3mHjZrW3HGmx5jMNaN1GhXT2WgXHjRCz if you wanna mine for me?
-
That's a missing library search path. execute the following command: export LD_LIBRARY_PATH=./:$LD_LIBRARY_PATH. After that start the miner.
EDIT: Could you use the address Pk3mHjZrW3HGmx5jMNaN1GhXT2WgXHjRCz if you wanna mine for me?
and how set GPU clock,GPU fans in linux?
why i juet 1 card work,can,t find the other cards?
yes i send to Pk3mHjZrW3HGmx5jMNaN1GhXT2WgXHjRCz
-
I am getting 6830 col/m on 5x Sapphire 7950 with stock settings. That is ~1370 col/m. I have Celeron with 4Gb Ram.
Does anybody knows, how to tweak performance to get closer to 1800 col/m as some users are reporting.
I am using Ubuntu 13.1 with the latest drivers and miner v0.1.3.
Please use v0.1.2 until the next version is released. This should be fastest on your GPU. I'm working on an update with huge performance gains.
v. 0.1.2 with some tweaks I managed to squeeze out 7250 col /m
v. 0.1.4 I am getting 9300col/m whoa
Slightly decreasing memory clock and increasing engine clock, using algorithm 1, I managed to increase speed to 10500. Whooha!
-
R9 R290, Catalyst 13.12, Powertune +20%, GPU@1025MHz and RAM@1250MHz with Linux-v0.1.4 running -a 0, two threads per GPU and no other load. So far, no one was able to reproduce this in Windows but it should be possible because even a 280X easily hits more than 2700cpm. Still wondering because yesterday a user with 2 R9 290X reported only about 6100 cpm.
Can I ask what you are using a version of the LINUX it?
I am using UBUNTU DESKTOP version
Only recognizes a GPU, only 2300C / M ，with 3800C/M so long way
Will there under LINUX how to modify the GPU CLOCK, MEM CLOCK, GPU fans
-
I am getting 6830 col/m on 5x Sapphire 7950 with stock settings. That is ~1370 col/m. I have Celeron with 4Gb Ram.
Does anybody knows, how to tweak performance to get closer to 1800 col/m as some users are reporting.
I am using Ubuntu 13.1 with the latest drivers and miner v0.1.3.
Please use v0.1.2 until the next version is released. This should be fastest on your GPU. I'm working on an update with huge performance gains.
v. 0.1.2 with some tweaks I managed to squeeze out 7250 col /m
v. 0.1.4 I am getting 9300col/m whoa
Slightly decreasing memory clock and increasing engine clock, using algorithm 1, I managed to increase speed to 10500. Whooha!
well thats interesting, decreasing memory mhz actually was a benefit? what were your stock settings and what did you adjust to? wondering if there is a magical percentage point between the two like when mining some other coins... usually I end up cranking the memory to max and adjusting engine after that...
-
Can I ask what you are using a version of the LINUX it?
I am using UBUNTU DESKTOP version
Only recognizes a GPU, only 2300C / M ，with 3800C/M so long way
Will there under LINUX how to modify the GPU CLOCK, MEM CLOCK, GPU fans
I tested on Gentoo. The command line tool to modify frequencies is aticonfig, which should work after enabling AMD Overdrive (see --help). How many GPUs do you have? For one GPU I would use -t 0,0 and for two -t 0,0,1,1 etc.
-
Sorry for the confusion. It seems that I got benefit by increasing engine clock. Reducing memory clock did not increase col/m. But it has slightly reduced temp. As I don't have watt meter, I was a bit conservative with setting.
Main drivers of increased speed are algorithm and engine clock.
-
I run clpts2.2 on a centos6 box, got the following messages:
%./clpts
./clpts: error while loading shared libraries: libcrypto.so.1.0.0: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory
would you please compile the program statically?
-
Sorry, that is caused by a dirty Makefile. I will upload a new version in a few minutes
EDIT: Done.
-
My card:
270x 1450 -a 1
280x 2450 -a 1
290 2600? -a 1(-a others is slower)
all cards not overclocked,seems 290 too low, is there some special setting need for 290?
I released a new version with large performance improvements. The syntax of the command line options of v0.1.x has changed and one has to specify the device IDs like in v0.2.x (see README). Furthermore, the command line option -a was introduced to select an algorithm. I guess that -a 0 or -a 2 should be fastest on R9 290(X) and -a 1 or -a 3 should be best for non-R9 290(X) cards.
-
Sometime within the next couple days I'm going to give Gentoo (or another distro) a try and see if I get any performance improvements.
Currently - 290X (1150Mhz/1375Mhz) - ~3200 cpm on Win7.64
-
hi Im from INDIA .. Today went to Market i asked R9 280X he said 22,500 INR each Piece (363$)... But he saying i ll give XFX Brand i dono about XFX its a good brand and price is correct?
-
Can I ask what you are using a version of the LINUX it?
I am using UBUNTU DESKTOP version
Only recognizes a GPU, only 2300C / M ，with 3800C/M so long way
Will there under LINUX how to modify the GPU CLOCK, MEM CLOCK, GPU fans
I tested on Gentoo. The command line tool to modify frequencies is aticonfig, which should work after enabling AMD Overdrive (see --help). How many GPUs do you have? For one GPU I would use -t 0,0 and for two -t 0,0,1,1 etc.
I have a 6 GPUS, use-T 0,1,2,3,4,5 but only GPU 0 at work, I still do not understand how, under LINUX for GPU overclocking
-
Maybe your Xorg.conf is screwed. Run aticonfig --initial --adapter=all as root and restart the computer.
-
i have a question.
how old is "too old" for the drivers. 12.8 too old?
also, my cards are:
rig1:
7950
5970
12.8 drivers
win7 x64
rig2:
7870
12.8 drivers
win7 x64
rig3:
270x
14.1 drivers
win7 x64
will this miner work with all 3 setups?
-
I fear that you have to try it yourself. catalyst 12.4 is too old. Could you give a feedback whether catalyst 12.8 works?
-
thank for your good works NAN ;D
I have better performance with -a 1 on my 290s (+100 cpm for 5*r9-290)
Continue , i love your miner :)
-
Thank for your miner
win7 x64
ASUS 280X 1125/1500 use two threads and -a 1 , 3280CPM
ASUS R9 290nonX(reference) 1025/1250 use two threads -a 0 only 2900CPM , why?
-
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Internal error: Input OpenCL binary is not for the target!
any suggestions guys?
-
I guess that you use a Catalyst driver that is too old. Please update the driver.
-
Hi :)
So, I got a little Problem...
C:\clpts-v0.1.4_win_x86-64>clpts_x86-64.exe PcGVSa1S5K7bYjL9BaBaEYzRdFHTwRW6PW -
t 2 -a 0
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.1.4
** by NaN - based on ptsminer.
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmail.com
** PTS: PtLx9kDLTXtR1ae3u7naXLPeGjjHZ1PGoR
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 3 (deviceID 0): Cypress
Name of device #2 / 3 (deviceID 1): Cypress
Name of device #3 / 3 (deviceID 2): Hawaii
spawning 1 worker thread(s)
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdo
pencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdo
pencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdo
pencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdo
pencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Hawaii':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 162)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 179)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 169)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 222)
Unrolled as requested!
[MASTER] 2014-Feb-11 01:32:40 | work received | sharetarget: 00ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffbeefde4d
[WORKER0] share found: 24033445 <-> 48762637 #1 (120) @ 1392078802
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:32:50 | 756.00 c/m | 6.00 sh/m | VL: 1 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER0] share found: 50185798 <-> 59691287 #2 (212) @ 1392078835
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:33:00 | 816.00 c/m | 6.00 sh/m | VL: 2 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER0] share found: 47562799 <-> 47929195 #3 (322) @ 1392078875
[WORKER0] share found: 15232725 <-> 38644667 #4 (410) @ 1392078907
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:33:10 | 832.00 c/m | 8.00 sh/m | VL: 4 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
Thats everything I get out of a R9 290. I'm a little disappointed.. :\
This is the result with one core of my 5970:
C:\clpts-v0.1.4_win_x86-64>clpts_x86-64.exe PcGVSa1S5K7bYjL9BaBaEYzRdFHTwRW6PW -t 0 -a 0
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.1.4
** by NaN - based on ptsminer.
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmail.com
** PTS: PtLx9kDLTXtR1ae3u7naXLPeGjjHZ1PGoR
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 3 (deviceID 0): Cypress
Name of device #2 / 3 (deviceID 1): Cypress
Name of device #3 / 3 (deviceID 2): Hawaii
spawning 1 worker thread(s)
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
[MASTER] 2014-Feb-11 01:37:17 | work received | sharetarget: 00ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffbeefde
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Cypress':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 162)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 179)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 169)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 222)
Unrolled as requested!
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:37:26 | 888.00 c/m | 0.00 sh/m | VL: 0 (0.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER0] share found: 31769787 <-> 22056509 #1 (292) @ 1392079122
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:37:36 | 888.00 c/m | 3.00 sh/m | VL: 1 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER0] share found: 14050831 <-> 38656591 #2 (350) @ 1392079137
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:37:46 | 880.00 c/m | 4.00 sh/m | VL: 2 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:37:56 | 891.00 c/m | 3.00 sh/m | VL: 2 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:38:06 | 873.60 c/m | 2.40 sh/m | VL: 2 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
and this if the other one:
C:\clpts-v0.1.4_win_x86-64>clpts_x86-64.exe PcGVSa1S5K7bYjL9BaBaEYzRdFHTwRW6PW -t 1 -a 0
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.1.4
** by NaN - based on ptsminer.
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmail.com
** PTS: PtLx9kDLTXtR1ae3u7naXLPeGjjHZ1PGoR
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 3 (deviceID 0): Cypress
Name of device #2 / 3 (deviceID 1): Cypress
Name of device #3 / 3 (deviceID 2): Hawaii
spawning 1 worker thread(s)
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
[MASTER] 2014-Feb-11 01:38:58 | work received | sharetarget: 00ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffbeefde4d
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Cypress':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 162)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 179)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 169)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 222)
Unrolled as requested!
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:39:08 | 588.00 c/m | 0.00 sh/m | VL: 0 (0.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER0] share found: 45539184 <-> 65899685 #1 (130) @ 1392079192
[WORKER0] share found: 37439257 <-> 18122184 #2 (228) @ 1392079227
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:39:18 | 684.00 c/m | 6.00 sh/m | VL: 1 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[MASTER] 2014-Feb-11 01:39:20 | work received | sharetarget: 00ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffbeefde4d
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:39:28 | 736.00 c/m | 4.00 sh/m | VL: 2 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER0] share found: 37708494 <-> 27113780 #3 (384) @ 1392079202
[WORKER0] share found: 67088250 <-> 45650505 #4 (488) @ 1392079242
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:39:38 | 741.00 c/m | 6.00 sh/m | VL: 4 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER0] share found: 31747746 <-> 4911902 #5 (672) @ 1392079289
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:39:48 | 811.20 c/m | 6.00 sh/m | VL: 5 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER0] share found: 32841255 <-> 51560351 #6 (698) @ 1392079295
[WORKER0] share found: 53682091 <-> 49001925 #7 (728) @ 1392079308
[WORKER0] share found: 44389161 <-> 25052278 #8 (778) @ 1392079322
[INFO] 2014-Feb-11 01:39:58 | mining 35s for developer
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:39:58 | 838.00 c/m | 8.00 sh/m | VL: 8 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:40:08 | 838.29 c/m | 6.86 sh/m | VL: 8 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
aaand everything together:
C:\clpts-v0.1.4_win_x86-64>clpts_x86-64.exe PcGVSa1S5K7bYjL9BaBaEYzRdFHTwRW6PW -t 0,1,2 -a 0
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.1.4
** by NaN - based on ptsminer.
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmail.com
** PTS: PtLx9kDLTXtR1ae3u7naXLPeGjjHZ1PGoR
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 3 (deviceID 0): Cypress
Name of device #2 / 3 (deviceID 1): Cypress
Name of device #3 / 3 (deviceID 2): Hawaii
spawning 3 worker thread(s)
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
[WORKER2] Hello, World!
[WORKER1] Hello, World!
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
[MASTER] 2014-Feb-11 01:40:48 | work received | sharetarget: 00ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffbeefde4d
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Hawaii':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 162)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 179)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 169)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 222)
Unrolled as requested!
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Cypress':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 162)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 179)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 169)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 222)
Unrolled as requested!
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Cypress':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 162)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 179)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 169)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 222)
Unrolled as requested!
[WORKER2] share found: 1668375 <-> 8285825 #1 (314) @ 1392079370
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:40:58 | 1944.00 c/m | 6.00 sh/m | VL: 1 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER1] share found: 8344346 <-> 38694816 #2 (328) @ 1392079330
[WORKER0] share found: 13636221 <-> 3287609 #3 (390) @ 1392079359
[WORKER2] share found: 46169116 <-> 59165253 #4 (396) @ 1392079391
[WORKER2] share found: 15325802 <-> 10509091 #5 (472) @ 1392079412
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:41:08 | 2292.00 c/m | 15.00 sh/m | VL: 5 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER1] share found: 47653015 <-> 26438904 #6 (856) @ 1392079471
[WORKER1] share found: 18482529 <-> 59748789 #7 (870) @ 1392079474
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:41:18 | 2460.00 c/m | 14.00 sh/m | VL: 7 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER1] share found: 30990259 <-> 14285902 #8 (1372) @ 1392079612
[WORKER2] share found: 18936802 <-> 35523611 #9 (1394) @ 1392079688
[WORKER2] share found: 43732581 <-> 30094639 #10 (1556) @ 1392079739
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:41:28 | 2469.00 c/m | 15.00 sh/m | VL: 10 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER0] share found: 46194975 <-> 37060684 #11 (1662) @ 1392079713
[WORKER1] share found: 3000725 <-> 46534740 #12 (1814) @ 1392079732
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:41:38 | 2529.60 c/m | 14.40 sh/m | VL: 12 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER1] share found: 43963157 <-> 39575243 #13 (2340) @ 1392079873
[WORKER1] share found: 39575243 <-> 43963157 #14 (2340) @ 1392079873
[WORKER0] share found: 42249946 <-> 12144704 #15 (2468) @ 1392079923
[WORKER1] share found: 15250890 <-> 29643259 #16 (2518) @ 1392079918
[INFO] 2014-Feb-11 01:41:48 | mining 35s for developer
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:41:48 | 2590.00 c/m | 16.00 sh/m | VL: 16 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER1] share found: 21633480 <-> 54256048 #17 (2882) @ 1392080020
[MASTER] 2014-Feb-11 01:41:55 | work received | sharetarget: 00ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffbeefde4d
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:41:58 | 2629.71 c/m | 14.57 sh/m | VL: 17 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER1] share found: 64748704 <-> 47392596 #18 (3112) @ 1392079357
[WORKER1] share found: 55495297 <-> 28938951 #19 (3440) @ 1392079459
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 01:42:08 | 2604.00 c/m | 14.25 sh/m | VL: 19 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
[WORKER2] share found: 65895148 <-> 1773391 #20 (3528) @ 1392079496
[WORKER0] share found: 58584626 <-> 457199 #21 (3668) @ 1392079524
Am I doing something wrong?
Please help me :(
-
version should be 13.25.5
If I am correct this should be the fglrx driver of Catalyst 12.9. This is too old
Hi Nan:
Just upgrade to 14.1 Beta , still not working :( (cgminer works fine)
http://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-articles/Pages/latest-linux-beta-driver.aspx
Regards
-
little off topic... just wanted to say I sold my first PTS today... I feel kinda giddy... tee-hee...
was quite a bit of a waiting process though, transactions sure weren't fast at the exchange, I got to 50 confirmations before they even recognized it almost 3 hours later, and thats with a transactions fee... usually it takes me under 10min when I send PTS to an individual and they confirm it... is this the typical exchange experience? (cryptsy - I've been reading horror stories)
-
little off topic... just wanted to say I sold my first PTS today... I feel kinda giddy... tee-hee...
was quite a bit of a waiting process though, transactions sure weren't fast at the exchange, I got to 50 confirmations before they even recognized it almost 3 hours later, and thats with a transactions fee... usually it takes me under 10min when I send PTS to an individual and they confirm it... is this the typical exchange experience? (cryptsy - I've been reading horror stories)
bter.com worked well until a few days ago when they disabled PTS deposit without any notice. No idea whether I can access my coins in the near future... Now I'm using cryptsy and your donation arrived but I checked this the first time a few hours after your donation. One of my friends is using cryptsy since two month without issues. Anyhow you should be careful with any exchange and the fuckup at mt. gox is a good example. Don't risk too much.
-
little off topic... just wanted to say I sold my first PTS today... I feel kinda giddy... tee-hee...
was quite a bit of a waiting process though, transactions sure weren't fast at the exchange, I got to 50 confirmations before they even recognized it almost 3 hours later, and thats with a transactions fee... usually it takes me under 10min when I send PTS to an individual and they confirm it... is this the typical exchange experience? (cryptsy - I've been reading horror stories)
bter.com worked well until a few days ago when they disabled PTS deposit without any notice. No idea whether I can access my coins in the near future... Now I'm using cryptsy and your donation arrived but I checked this the first time a few hours after your donation. One of my friends is using cryptsy since two month without issues. Anyhow you should be careful with any exchange and the fuckup at mt. gox is a good example. Don't risk too much.
yeah I'm terrified to send a large amount and do a big cash out... thats why I did a 1 coin test... but I always fear when I do the real move thats when it won't work after all I have read... if only there was a return policy with transferring coins... I'm not sure what is the bigger risk... buying mining equipment, or transferring to an exchange...
-
Wow that took forever, damn kernel issues followed with power issues....
Anyway, here are my Ubuntu results. R9 290X (1040/1250)
GPU 1 - [STATS] 2014-Feb-11 00:27:11 | 4153.40 c/m | 16.60 sh/m | VL: 119 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
GPU 2 - [STATS] 2014-Feb-11 00:21:54 | 4237.20 c/m | 16.20 sh/m | VL: 26 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
Decided to run one command line on each GPU with 2 threads each just to measure individual performance. I'll run -t 0,0,1,1 next.
This is a 1000cpm change over my Win7.64 Mining rig with the same specs.
Thanks a lot NaN!!
I'll send you something tomorrow :D
-
Nice! So Linux is indeed faster than Windows for R9 290(X) cards.
-
Please try to release Nvidia edition with equivalent cpm ASAP~~~ thanks a lot. My GTX690 only has 280x speed in ptsGPUz, come on. T.T
-
Nice! So Linux is indeed faster than Windows for R9 290(X) cards.
Interestingly, I used-t 0 is the speed of CPM 2380, with the-t 0,0 is CPM 2980, 7970 single card default frequency.
Why is this so?
-
Wow that took forever, damn kernel issues followed with power issues....
Anyway, here are my Ubuntu results. R9 290X (1040/1250)
GPU 1 - [STATS] 2014-Feb-11 00:27:11 | 4153.40 c/m | 16.60 sh/m | VL: 119 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
GPU 2 - [STATS] 2014-Feb-11 00:21:54 | 4237.20 c/m | 16.20 sh/m | VL: 26 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
Decided to run one command line on each GPU with 2 threads each just to measure individual performance. I'll run -t 0,0,1,1 next.
This is a 1000cpm change over my Win7.64 Mining rig with the same specs.
Thanks a lot NaN!!
I'll send you something tomorrow :D
wow，so fast！ :o
-
Nice! So Linux is indeed faster than Windows for R9 290(X) cards.
Interestingly, I used-t 0 is the speed of CPM 2380, with the-t 0,0 is CPM 2980, 7970 single card default frequency.
Why is this so?
used -t 0 a 1 cpm 2380
used -t 0,0 a1 cpm 2920
used -t 0,0,0 a1 cpm 300
7970 925/1250 win7 64bit singe.
But this will set the speed multi-card declined 4 280x set-t 0,0,1,1 10200 from 11400 down to why there is a single card and multi-card upgrade will fall?
-
To run the miner on all four cards you have to use -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3. additionally you could add -a 1, which should be faster than -a 0 (which are the defaults) on 7970. There is no option "a".
-
To run the miner on all four cards you have to use -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3. additionally you could add -a 1, which should be faster than -a 0 (which are the defaults) on 7970. There is no option "a".
Yes, I used the -a 1 command, but in a multi-card rate declines and this is what I can not understand, my single cards rose to 7970 from 2380 to 2920 CPM, why it would fall under the multi-card
-
To run the miner on all four cards you have to use -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3. additionally you could add -a 1, which should be faster than -a 0 (which are the defaults) on 7970. There is no option "a".
what is the difference between using 0,1,2,3 or the way you mentioned?
thx
-
I think R9 290(X) use two threads no effect in windows , same core and memory clock use two threads no different with one threads.
-
Hi,
This app is really nice but i have a problem on one computer. With the same drivers as every other, i have less cpm that on other. Tested on a fresh install on another part of my hard drive, it's working full power. The problem is on my personal install and don't want to format everyting. I'm running ubuntu 13.10.
I have try to clean, purge the drivers and reinstall but still less cpm that on a fresh install.
Do you have an idea what file i should check to have full cpm power like on a fresh install ?
-
To run the miner on all four cards you have to use -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3. additionally you could add -a 1, which should be faster than -a 0 (which are the defaults) on 7970. There is no option "a".
I know the problem, the next single card is behind the 7970 fix release, other multi-card is still using the original 2.2 version, re-download the new version of the normal speed of 4 280x at 14000 CPM .WIN7 64
-
NAN, this software is amazing, just more of a parameter can be 23 percent faster overall than the 0.2 version upgrade 64%, amazing, thank you!!
-
Tested under power, increased from 780 watts to 880 watts, increase the percentage of 12.8%
Speeds from 11200 CPM raised to 14020 CPM, increase the percentage of 25%
4 * 280x win7 64bit
-
Maybe your Xorg.conf is screwed. Run aticonfig --initial --adapter=all as root and restart the computer.
and how to set gpu fans in linux?
-
BTER.com PTS is there
http://bter.com/trade/pts_btc
Its on the Front from BTC
-
Tested under power, increased from 780 watts to 880 watts, increase the percentage of 12.8%
Speeds from 11200 CPM raised to 14020 CPM, increase the percentage of 25%
4 * 280x win7 64bit
I am a bit confused over the correct scrypt to use.
Can you please show yours?
I am using 3 280X cards running @ 1150/1500 and I get 7880 cpm in a single screen. When I open a second thread I get 2330 cpm on that thread and the first thread slowly goes lower and lower untill it goes under the 7880 total cpm together. Should I use the -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 command? And also add -a 1 or not at all?
-
Still playing with running 2 threads under Win8.1x64 w/R9 290's.
While I have noticed that -a 1 provides the best results on my gpu's,
so far running -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 hasn't shown much more c/m's BUT
it has shown a huge increase in CPU usage. Using a single thread per
GPU my CPU would sit around 2% utilization, however when running
two threads per GPU my CPU is now at 63% utilization. I suspect that
clpts is having internal conflicts when running 2 threads under Win8.1x64.
Just reporting findings to help the community out. MANY thanks NaN for
the awesome software (again)!
-
Tested under power, increased from 780 watts to 880 watts, increase the percentage of 12.8%
Speeds from 11200 CPM raised to 14020 CPM, increase the percentage of 25%
4 * 280x win7 64bit
I am a bit confused over the correct scrypt to use.
Can you please show yours?
I am using 3 280X cards running @ 1150/1500 and I get 7880 cpm in a single screen. When I open a second thread I get 2330 cpm on that thread and the first thread slowly goes lower and lower untill it goes under the 7880 total cpm together. Should I use the -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 command? And also add -a 1 or not at all?
use the -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 1
over
-
use the -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 1
over
Thank you very much. I will give it a try and report back.
-
So finally... no CUDA miner realized? ::)
-
Still playing with running 2 threads under Win8.1x64 w/R9 290's.
While I have noticed that -a 1 provides the best results on my gpu's,
so far running -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 hasn't shown much more c/m's BUT
it has shown a huge increase in CPU usage. Using a single thread per
GPU my CPU would sit around 2% utilization, however when running
two threads per GPU my CPU is now at 63% utilization. I suspect that
clpts is having internal conflicts when running 2 threads under Win8.1x64.
Just reporting findings to help the community out. MANY thanks NaN for
the awesome software (again)!
I had the same CPU leap under windows 8.1 64bit as well... I just thought it was my crummy 270X cards, but now that you mention its a problem for the 290X there might be something to this... normally I am under 1% cpu usage for clpts, but when I launch a second copy on the same cards, I leap to 40% cpu usage split between the two instances...
-
Does anyone have a link to a good ubuntu install with directions for a bootable usb flash drive, so I may try booting my system under ubuntu to try the other version out... so far I have failed and found malware or installs that did not seem to jive with the directions they put out there... I mean there has to be a simple image out there that'll fit on a 16GB flash drive just waiting to be written...
(I should say a current ubuntu install, I've found many old ones but I'm trying to find ones that will work out of the bat for a complete linux novice with R9 drivers)
Heh, thank you to the person who PM'd me quickly with the link below... you can download the pen drive program, as well as the 13.10 iso quickly... I guess they were right, I really did over think it by searching out specific things instead of just going to ubuntu directly.
http://www.ubuntu.com/download/desktop/create-a-usb-stick-on-windows
-
So finally... no CUDA miner realized? ::)
I'm working on Nvidia support but I do not have a fully functional version yet.
-
So finally... no CUDA miner realized? ::)
I'm working on Nvidia support but I do not have a fully functional version yet.
We are all expecting your outcomes and will appreciate for everything you will be done for nvidia. Hope we will have similar performance as AMD.
-
That update, with my R9 290x with 2.1 i have 2k cpm and im happy, with this update 3k Oo, Thank you so much. Please add nvidia :D i have 3 nvidia :(.
Ps : with r9 290X i have the beter result without -a, 3150 cpm.
-
So finally... no CUDA miner realized? ::)
I'm working on Nvidia support but I do not have a fully functional version yet.
Thanks for the reply NaN, could you give to us a little idea about the performances?
;) Regards
-
You should get in touch with cbuchner1, maybe you can come up with an improved mmc/pts miner.
-
Listen to this. I have 3 280X.
1 Gigabyte 280X windforce OC
2 Sapphire 280X regular model.
The -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 1 scrypt did not work well enough for my setup. I reached 8400 CPM with it.
I think I found out why.
The sapphires run now each in their own window @ 3496 & 3457 CPM each using 2 threads and -a 1 algorith
The Gigabyte does not like that. It stays around the 1.400 cpm mark. I do use it for the monitor but ok.
So i delete the -a 1 scrypt; 1600 cpm. MEH
So I take it back to basics: 1 thread and no algorith choice.
Now it runs happily at 2.600 cpm.
ODD
So one 280X is not the other 280X and for PTS mining I would RIGHT NOW recommend the Sapphire regular version of the 280X. BUT just because of my own experience. I like the Gigabytes but I can't find the optimal configuration yet.
I am happily chugging away at 9700 cpm in total now with these 3 cards
And @ 1150 shares per hour.
Not too shabby. With the right cards a full rig of 280Xs (5 pieces) would ramp up to 16.500 cpm and 1.800+ spm.
-
Wow! That's VERY impressive indeed! I have 4 x MSI R9 290 Gaming cards running
Win8.1x64 with tweaked settings from AfterBurner and I'm only getting ~12300 c/m
with the latest software from NaN. I'm still tackling the 2 thread thing myself and
currently run the -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 which doesn't get me much more c/m but severely
increases my CPU usage for some reason. I'm assuming you are running Windows as
well since you mentioned "run in their own window" or are you running Linux and just
have multiple terminals open? Much thanks for this info!
:-)
Listen to this. I have 3 280X.
1 Gigabyte 280X windforce OC
2 Sapphire 280X regular model.
The -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 1 scrypt did not work well enough for my setup. I reached 8400 CPM with it.
I think I found out why.
The sapphires run now each in their own window @ 3496 & 3457 CPM each using 2 threads and -a 1 algorith
The Gigabyte does not like that. It stays around the 1.400 cpm mark. I do use it for the monitor but ok.
So i delete the -a 1 scrypt; 1600 cpm. MEH
So I take it back to basics: 1 thread and no algorith choice.
Now it runs happily at 2.600 cpm.
ODD
So one 280X is not the other 280X and for PTS mining I would RIGHT NOW recommend the Sapphire regular version of the 280X. BUT just because of my own experience. I like the Gigabytes but I can't find the optimal configuration yet.
I am happily chugging away at 9700 cpm in total now with these 3 cards
And @ 1150 shares per hour.
Not too shabby. With the right cards a full rig of 280Xs (5 pieces) would ramp up to 16.500 cpm and 1.800+ spm.
-
Can you implement something similar to the Intensity in cgminer?
I would like to work and keep mining using the same GPU.
Thank you very much for your hard work!
-
if you have a 280 gpu with no monitor connected, you can run -t 0,0 (2 threads).
with monitor connected you better run -t 0 (1 threads)
So i have to run -t 0,0,1 (3 threads) because at device 1 there is my monitor....
-t 0,0,1 gives me 6200 cpm with 2x 280x
-
if you have a 280 gpu with no monitor connected, you can run -t 0,0 (2 threads).
with monitor connected you better run -t 0 (1 threads)
So i have to run -t 0,0,1 (3 threads) because at device 1 there is my monitor....
-t 0,0,1 gives me 6200 cpm with 2x 280x
I'm using CAD software, and I get some lag, I need to decrease the intensity.
Note: I'm using 1x280x - Sapphire Dual-X, and using 2 threads makes cpm drop to around 1400. Seems that there are different results for 280x
-
Just wanna check if my values are okay or not:
I got actually 2 R9 290, producing about 6400 cpm, but only ~24 spm. Is this okay? I'm just asking because Hukkel said 16900 cpm will make about 1800 spm... that would make 600+ spm for my 6400 cpm (if I wasn't to sleepy to calcuate that :D):/
-
My 4 x R9 290's are getting 12270 c/m (collisions / min) and ypool is reporting 1360 s/h (shares / hour).
I think Hukkei meant to say 1800+ s/h (shares / hour), not 1800 s/m (shares / min). You might be missing
the hour & minutes conversion since your 24 s/m is really 1440 s/h.
:-)
Just wanna check if my values are okay or not:
I got actually 2 R9 290, producing about 6400 cpm, but only ~24 spm. Is this okay? I'm just asking because Hukkel said 16900 cpm will make about 1800 spm... that would make 600+ spm for my 6400 cpm (if I wasn't to sleepy to calcuate that :D):/
-
Got Ubuntu installed on my second rig, this time I decided to try out some OC. I used one 290X for this test, clocked at 1150/1400. Only Running -t 0,0, no gains noticed from -a.
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 19:49:25 | 4582.29 c/m | 17.71 sh/m | VL: 62 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
-
Hello,everyone!I have 2 290s and 2 7970s.I found something weird：290@1180/1400 only got 3250Cpm/card(two threads -a 1) and 7970@1050/1500 got 3300cpm/card(two threads -a 1) ,13000cpm total.290 even slower than 7970?I can not accpet it.Please tell me how to tweak it?Thx.
-
Hi NaN. I have 4*R9 290x running on Xubuntu 64 and they are round 16000 cpm for two days. Today I replaced my old motherboard and restart the miner. It hits 16000 cpm than decreases gradually about 100 cpm per sec. After it hit around 8000 cpm, the computer freezes. I restart the computer and try to run the miner. The miner isn't be able to start anymore. Do you have any idea about it? My catalyst is the latest version from amd.
I also tried the old version and it didn't work too.
EDIT: The error message is "error in xptMiner/clInit.cpp, line 96: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)"
-
Seriously??? I know the 290X is a wee bit faster than the 290 (more shaders) but I've over clocked
my 4 x 290's to 1125/1350 and running -t 0,1,2,3,4 -a 1 and only getting 12300 c/m and 46 sh/m.
Is the 290x really THAT much faster or are we seeing a big difference between using clpts on linux
versus windows? If it weren't for the over clocking ease of windows I would definitely be on linux!!
Got Ubuntu installed on my second rig, this time I decided to try out some OC. I used one 290X for this test, clocked at 1150/1400. Only Running -t 0,0, no gains noticed from -a.
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 19:49:25 | 4582.29 c/m | 17.71 sh/m | VL: 62 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
-
Seriously??? I know the 290X is a wee bit faster than the 290 (more shaders) but I've over clocked
my 4 x 290's to 1125/1350 and running -t 0,1,2,3,4 -a 1 and only getting 12300 c/m and 46 sh/m.
Is the 290x really THAT much faster or are we seeing a big difference between using clpts on linux
versus windows? If it weren't for the over clocking ease of windows I would definitely be on linux!!
Got Ubuntu installed on my second rig, this time I decided to try out some OC. I used one 290X for this test, clocked at 1150/1400. Only Running -t 0,0, no gains noticed from -a.
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 19:49:25 | 4582.29 c/m | 17.71 sh/m | VL: 62 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
Yes seriously. clpts runs better on Linux. I was only getting about 3000cpm per 290X on Windows, around 3200 if I overclocked.
I just created some shell scripts, one sets both GPUs to 1150/1400 and the other sets my fans to 100%. I have one that also prints the GPU temp, but I don't know how accurate that is lol.
-
Got Ubuntu installed on my second rig, this time I decided to try out some OC. I used one 290X for this test, clocked at 1150/1400. Only Running -t 0,0, no gains noticed from -a.
[STATS] 2014-Feb-11 19:49:25 | 4582.29 c/m | 17.71 sh/m | VL: 62 (100.00%), RJ: 0 (0.00%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
would you please tell me how to OC in Ubuntu? I'm new to linux :)
-
So finally... no CUDA miner realized? ::)
I'm working on Nvidia support but I do not have a fully functional version yet.
gtx580 not deviceid 0
-
I am using stock Ubuntu 3.10 and Josh Patten Bootstrap mining.
-
Anyone tried using a virtual machine to run linux in windows ? Any gain? Or the primary system needs to be Linux?
-
three his 280x ,win7 13.1dirver.just get 57xx, it's too bad. use -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 .
if add -a 1, the miner can not run.
so, help me!
-
three his 280x ,win7 13.1dirver.just get 57xx, it's too bad. use -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 .
if add -a 1, the miner can not run.
so, help me!
Make in the pool 3 different workers and make 3 different .bat files. Each for one gfx card and one worker.
so -t 0,0 worker1 in the first, -t 1,1 in the second etc etc.
Make sure you turn crossfire off.
Go and have a look what each card produces.
Oh and use the latest clpts2.2 miner software.
-
three his 280x ,win7 13.1dirver.just get 57xx, it's too bad. use -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 .
if add -a 1, the miner can not run.
so, help me!
Which version do you use? I guess that you're using an old one. Use v0.1.4 or v0.2.2. If your monitor is attached to GPU 0, then I would use -t 0,1,1,2,2 and I would try -t 0,1,2 too. -a 1 should be fastest.
-
Hi NaN, any update for CUDA miner so far?
-
three his 280x ,win7 13.1dirver.just get 57xx, it's too bad. use -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 .
if add -a 1, the miner can not run.
so, help me!
Which version do you use? I guess that you're using an old one. Use v0.1.4 or v0.2.2. If your monitor is attached to GPU 0, then I would use -t 0,1,1,2,2 and I would try -t 0,1,2 too. -a 1 should be fastest.
Hello NaN, I thought 0,1,2.... is the number of card ? because for 4 card i use 0,1,2,3.
What exactly is his number? eg for a single card I put t 0? it would change something to put 0,1,2 for a single card?
-
three his 280x ,win7 13.1dirver.just get 57xx, it's too bad. use -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 .
if add -a 1, the miner can not run.
so, help me!
Which version do you use? I guess that you're using an old one. Use v0.1.4 or v0.2.2. If your monitor is attached to GPU 0, then I would use -t 0,1,1,2,2 and I would try -t 0,1,2 too. -a 1 should be fastest.
Hello NaN, I thought 0,1,2.... is the number of card ? because for 4 card i use 0,1,2,3.
What exactly is his number? eg for a single card I put t 0? it would change something to put 0,1,2 for a single card?
The numbers after -t are the DeviceIDs, which are shown during startup (DeviceID x). For each number in the list the miner starts one thread. Normally, the first GPU has DeviceID 0 so that -t 0 mines with one thread on the first card and -t 1 means that the miner uses one thread on the second card, etc. Thus, -t 2,2 means that the miner should launch two threads on the third GPU. It might increase your performance but at least the Windows driver of R9 290(X) seems to be broken and only the Linux driver functions with full speed. Just try whether -t 0,1,1,2,2,3,3 or -t 0,1,2,3 give you better performance if you are using four GPUs.
-
I've switched over from Windows 8.1x64 to Ubuntu 13.04x64 and INDEED there is a significant
increase in speed. Wow.. thank you NaN! Now I'm delving into tweaking the GPU clock, memory,
fan, etc. I've read extensively about aticonfig and I can seem to get it to work on the first (default)
adapter, but every time I try to use the --adapter parameter it seems to only be setting/getting the
first (default) GPU. For example, aticonfig --adapter="all" --odgt returns four values but they are
all the same. I'm suing kernel 3.8.0-35 and catalyst 13.12. Is this a good combo? Perhaps there
are other (GUI) utilities out there? Much appreciated!
Running 4 x MSI R9 290 Gaming
-
Indeed, aticonfig does not work in multi GPU setups. The easiest thing for me was to write a cgminer config-file so that after booting up, cgminer is started, then closed and after that I execute my miner.
-
Can't thank you enough for your software AND that great suggestion!!
Time for me to go implement it!!
:-)
Indeed, aticonfig does not work in multi GPU setups. The easiest thing for me was to write a cgminer config-file so that after booting up, cgminer is started, then closed and after that I execute my miner.
-
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Internal error: Input OpenCL binary is not for the target!
How to fix this?
My card is 7950,and driver 13.1
-
Sorry to bother NaN but I would like to know what method you (or any others) use to monitor GPU
temps under Linux since aticonfig doesn't work with multi-gpu configurations?
Indeed, aticonfig does not work in multi GPU setups. The easiest thing for me was to write a cgminer config-file so that after booting up, cgminer is started, then closed and after that I execute my miner.
-
Can anyone please comment on what you are getting with the latest version on a 290X?
-
thanks. i'll try.
-
three his 280x ,win7 13.1dirver.just get 57xx, it's too bad. use -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 .
if add -a 1, the miner can not run.
so, help me!
Which version do you use? I guess that you're using an old one. Use v0.1.4 or v0.2.2. If your monitor is attached to GPU 0, then I would use -t 0,1,1,2,2 and I would try -t 0,1,2 too. -a 1 should be fastest.
Thanks!
Hi,NaN
it's solved,I used v0.2 ,just 55xx. After i changed to v 0.2.2 ,the speed goes up to 75xx.
I found the miner has potentiality to increase speed. i used cg to mine ltc or doge,the power was nearly 900w. now ,i use this miner ,the power just 510w. So, how can incease the speed? overlock?
-
I've switched over from Windows 8.1x64 toUbuntu 13.04x64 and INDEED there is a significant
increase in speed. Wow.. thank you NaN! Now I'm delving into tweaking the GPU clock, memory,
fan, etc. I've read extensively about aticonfig and I can seem to get it to work on the first (default)
adapter, but every time I try to use the --adapter parameter it seems to only be setting/getting the
first (default) GPU. For example, aticonfig --adapter="all" --odgt returns four values but they are
all the same. I'm suing kernel 3.8.0-35 and catalyst 13.12. Is this a good combo? Perhaps there
are other (GUI) utilities out there? Much appreciated!
Running 4 x MSI R9 290 Gaming
What is the speed of R9 290 Gaming under Ubuntu?
-
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Internal error: Input OpenCL binary is not for the target!
How to fix this?
My card is 7950,and driver 13.1
Which OS? Catalyst 13.1 is most likely too old. Please try to update.
Thanks!
Hi,NaN
it's solved,I used v0.2 ,just 55xx. After i changed to v 0.2.2 ,the speed goes up to 75xx.
I found the miner has potentiality to increase speed. i used cg to mine ltc or doge,the power was nearly 900w. now ,i use this miner ,the power just 510w. So, how can incease the speed? overlock?
Try to play around with the settings because 75xx cpm seems too low. Overclocking is most likely possible because of the low power usage. Most important is GPU core frequency but be aware of the pitfalls when overclocking Tahiti GPUs.
-
Three HIS 280x ,speed goes up to 96XX! add -a 2
(http://e.hiphotos.baidu.com/image/w%3D2048%3Bq%3D90/sign=cda91faca344ad342ebf8087e49a3785/e7cd7b899e510fb353aecad6db33c895d1430c3f.jpg)
-
I think I finally have my 4 x MSI R9 290 rig setup under Ubuntu running clpts v0.2.2
with all the tweaks for now. Currently mining on Ypool at the moment and getting :
collisions/min : 15130
shares/hr : 1730
The total rig is pulling 1100w with a 20" box fan running on low to keep air circulating.
I've switched over from Windows 8.1x64 toUbuntu 13.04x64 and INDEED there is a significant
increase in speed. Wow.. thank you NaN! Now I'm delving into tweaking the GPU clock, memory,
fan, etc. I've read extensively about aticonfig and I can seem to get it to work on the first (default)
adapter, but every time I try to use the --adapter parameter it seems to only be setting/getting the
first (default) GPU. For example, aticonfig --adapter="all" --odgt returns four values but they are
all the same. I'm suing kernel 3.8.0-35 and catalyst 13.12. Is this a good combo? Perhaps there
are other (GUI) utilities out there? Much appreciated!
Running 4 x MSI R9 290 Gaming
What is the speed of R9 290 Gaming under Ubuntu?
-
ERRORS when running clpts-v.0.2.2 on Ubuntu 13.04
Invalid share
Reason: Merkleroot is invalid or corrupted. Update your miner.
Invalid share
Reason : No valid momentum
Was just looking through the output of my current mining run and though I'd pass these on to NaN.
Many thanks again for all your hard work NaN!!
-
I am getting an error when trying to run this miner.
./clpts -u x.pts_1 -p x -t 0,1
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 2 (deviceID 0): Tahiti
Name of device #2 / 2 (deviceID 1): Tahiti
Fee Percentage: 2.50%. To set, use "-d" flag e.g. "-d 3.5" is 3.5% donation
spawning 2 worker threads
[b]error while opening the file gpuhash_0. Exiting...
[/b]
dpkg -l|grep fgl
ii fglrx 2:13.200-0ubuntu1 amd64 Video driver for the AMD graphics accelerators
ii fglrx-amdcccle 2:13.200-0ubuntu1 amd64 Catalyst Control Center for the AMD graphics accelerators
ii fglrx-dev 2:13.200-0ubuntu1 amd64 Video driver for the AMD graphics accelerators (devel files)
~ $
-
ERRORS when running clpts-v.0.2.2 on Ubuntu 13.04
Invalid share
Reason: Merkleroot is invalid or corrupted. Update your miner.
Invalid share
Reason : No valid momentum
Was just looking through the output of my current mining run and though I'd pass these on to NaN.
Many thanks again for all your hard work NaN!!
Is your time correct (execute date to get the time)? I have no idea how Ubuntu handles time zones. Windows sets the hardware clock to local time but Linux normally assumes UTC.
-
I am getting an error when trying to run this miner.
[...]
spawning 2 worker threads
[b]error while opening the file gpuhash_0. Exiting...
[/b][...]
Are the files gpuhash_x in the same directory as the binary? I guess that the application cannot find the file.
-
I forgot to mention that these are random/rare errors. Very sporadic and not really an issue at all.
I thought I would throw them out for future debugging or possible low-level issues to investigate.
Time on my Ubuntu rig is spot on and set automatically from the internet. No worries, just wanted
to pass this on. As always, many thanks NaN!
ERRORS when running clpts-v.0.2.2 on Ubuntu 13.04
Invalid share
Reason: Merkleroot is invalid or corrupted. Update your miner.
Invalid share
Reason : No valid momentum
Was just looking through the output of my current mining run and though I'd pass these on to NaN.
Many thanks again for all your hard work NaN!!
Is your time correct (execute date to get the time)? I have no idea how Ubuntu handles time zones. Windows sets the hardware clock to local time but Linux normally assumes UTC.
-
I am getting an error when trying to run this miner.
[...]
spawning 2 worker threads
[b]error while opening the file gpuhash_0. Exiting...
[/b][...]
Are the files gpuhash_x in the same directory as the binary? I guess that the application cannot find the file.
you are right, I had to cd to the directory as the binary before it started working. Thanks.
Now I get a different error:
Internal error: Input OpenCL binary is not for the target!
dpkg -l|grep fgl
ii fglrx 2:13.200-0ubuntu1 amd64 Video driver for the AMD graphics accelerators
ii fglrx-amdcccle 2:13.200-0ubuntu1 amd64 Catalyst Control Center for the AMD graphics accelerators
ii fglrx-dev
-
Has anyone successfully set the GPU voltage using cgminer under linux for a R9 290(X)?
I have my gpu clock, memory, and fan settings where I want them to be but I wouldn't
mind under-volting the GPU to save a little energy and heat. I *believe* cgminer wants
an exact voltage and not a delta but I could be wrong. I don't know what the normal
voltage is for a R9 290 and every attempt to enter an absolute value like 1.25 fails (out
of boundary). Many thanks in advance!
-
So tinkering around with clpts... I was wondering... can you run six gpu's on windows, since everyone says its almost impossible without heavy modifications to windows and/or the drivers...
since I see a lot of fuss over people being able to run five with difficulty, and so many have to use some weird trick or tip to get six to work... so I ran to a friends, borrowed two video cards, and now I have an answer!
yes you can run six gpu's on windows 8.1 64bit...
I didn't need to do anything fancy for windows... hooked up to the risers and turned it on... came up right away...
Now I should mention, it was more challenging to get the BIOS to recognize all six cards, than windows... I had to disable several things in the BIOS, change all the pcie 16x slots to pcie 1x... and of course disable the onboard graphics (which I actually had been using since it was nice to mine full bore on the cards and use the onboard for daily work with no flickering).
my friend just called and asked when I'll have the cards back, I wish this was like borrowing a garden hose and he'd forget... he doesn't want to go all night without full mining, the sickness we all share!
I think the reason this was so easy, they were all the same GPU chipset, the pitcairn, a mix of 270 and 270X cards... I now wish I had a 7th one to test and see if I could get all seven to work together at once... I think this is the reason I love coin mining, its just one big hobby to tinker around with things and see what you can do.
-
running 6 gpu on one motherboard is very easy to burn your ATX connector on mother board since each pcie slot will draw 75w from motherboard. if you want to put more than 4 cards on same motherboard ,you need to use powered riser for pcie
So tinkering around with clpts... I was wondering... can you run six gpu's on windows, since everyone says its almost impossible without heavy modifications to windows and/or the drivers...
since I see a lot of fuss over people being able to run five with difficulty, and so many have to use some weird trick or tip to get six to work... so I ran to a friends, borrowed two video cards, and now I have an answer!
yes you can run six gpu's on windows 8.1 64bit...
I didn't need to do anything fancy for windows... hooked up to the risers and turned it on... came up right away...
Now I should mention, it was more challenging to get the BIOS to recognize all six cards, than windows... I had to disable several things in the BIOS, change all the pcie 16x slots to pcie 1x... and of course disable the onboard graphics (which I actually had been using since it was nice to mine full bore on the cards and use the onboard for daily work with no flickering).
my friend just called and asked when I'll have the cards back, I wish this was like borrowing a garden hose and he'd forget... he doesn't want to go all night without full mining, the sickness we all share!
I think the reason this was so easy, they were all the same GPU chipset, the pitcairn, a mix of 270 and 270X cards... I now wish I had a 7th one to test and see if I could get all seven to work together at once... I think this is the reason I love coin mining, its just one big hobby to tinker around with things and see what you can do.
-
running 6 gpu on one motherboard is very easy to burn your ATX connector on mother board since each pcie slot will draw 75w from motherboard. if you want to put more than 4 cards on same motherboard ,you need to use powered riser for pcie
So tinkering around with clpts... I was wondering... can you run six gpu's on windows, since everyone says its almost impossible without heavy modifications to windows and/or the drivers...
since I see a lot of fuss over people being able to run five with difficulty, and so many have to use some weird trick or tip to get six to work... so I ran to a friends, borrowed two video cards, and now I have an answer!
yes you can run six gpu's on windows 8.1 64bit...
I didn't need to do anything fancy for windows... hooked up to the risers and turned it on... came up right away...
Now I should mention, it was more challenging to get the BIOS to recognize all six cards, than windows... I had to disable several things in the BIOS, change all the pcie 16x slots to pcie 1x... and of course disable the onboard graphics (which I actually had been using since it was nice to mine full bore on the cards and use the onboard for daily work with no flickering).
my friend just called and asked when I'll have the cards back, I wish this was like borrowing a garden hose and he'd forget... he doesn't want to go all night without full mining, the sickness we all share!
I think the reason this was so easy, they were all the same GPU chipset, the pitcairn, a mix of 270 and 270X cards... I now wish I had a 7th one to test and see if I could get all seven to work together at once... I think this is the reason I love coin mining, its just one big hobby to tinker around with things and see what you can do.
Would these risers work?
http://www.aliexpress.com/snapshot/6019993001.html
-
Yes the idea is good. But you get them cheaper on Ebay. Plain regular risers or USB3.0 ones that are very nice in terms of use of space.
If you buy the ASRock H81 BTC mobo you don't need powered risers as the mobo has 2 4 pin molex connectors you can connect the PSU to so the extra 75W comes from them.
For the Linux users; is it possible to run more than 5 cards there? Win8 has a max of 5 and only for the HD79** series there is a custom driver available to run 6.
-
hi all, how can I fix this?
290X with amd_13_12_catalyst_64bit_whql
thx alot
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.2.2 (ypool.net only)
** by NaN - based on xptMiner by jh00 (clintar's code v1.1)
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmai
l.com
** PTS: PajuVUWrcPn5ksCFfrBiWQXvpwtE29dcN2
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 1 (deviceID 0): Hawaii
Fee Percentage: 2.50%. To set, use "-d" flag e.g. "-d 3.5" is 3.5% donation
Connection attempt failed, retry in 45 seconds
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Hawaii':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 162)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 179)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 169)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 222)
Unrolled as requested!
Connection attempt failed, retry in 45 seconds
Connection attempt failed, retry in 45 seconds
-
three his 280x ,win7 13.1dirver.just get 57xx, it's too bad. use -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 .
if add -a 1, the miner can not run.
so, help me!
Which version do you use? I guess that you're using an old one. Use v0.1.4 or v0.2.2. If your monitor is attached to GPU 0, then I would use -t 0,1,1,2,2 and I would try -t 0,1,2 too. -a 1 should be fastest.
Hello NaN, I thought 0,1,2.... is the number of card ? because for 4 card i use 0,1,2,3.
What exactly is his number? eg for a single card I put t 0? it would change something to put 0,1,2 for a single card?
The numbers after -t are the DeviceIDs, which are shown during startup (DeviceID x). For each number in the list the miner starts one thread. Normally, the first GPU has DeviceID 0 so that -t 0 mines with one thread on the first card and -t 1 means that the miner uses one thread on the second card, etc. Thus, -t 2,2 means that the miner should launch two threads on the third GPU. It might increase your performance but at least the Windows driver of R9 290(X) seems to be broken and only the Linux driver functions with full speed. Just try whether -t 0,1,1,2,2,3,3 or -t 0,1,2,3 give you better performance if you are using four GPUs.
thank you NaN for the explicatio, when i try -t 0,1,1,2,2,3,3 i dont know why but i have invalid password or usernam worker.
I have beter result with version x86 that x64, i have windows 64 bits.
-
Has anyone successfully set the GPU voltage using cgminer under linux for a R9 290(X)?
I have my gpu clock, memory, and fan settings where I want them to be but I wouldn't
mind under-volting the GPU to save a little energy and heat. I *believe* cgminer wants
an exact voltage and not a delta but I could be wrong. I don't know what the normal
voltage is for a R9 290 and every attempt to enter an absolute value like 1.25 fails (out
of boundary). Many thanks in advance!
I have been in that same situation for the last two days. I found some good clocks that provide a rather good performance boost in-terms of c/m. I have my 290X's running at 1150/1150. The core increase raised my c/m by ~400, the problem is that I am having some heating issues (80C - 85C - 90C spikes)...I'll try to figure out a way to undervolt on linux, I'll post my solution here if I find anything. If you find something please share.
At the moment I have multiple .sh files that I execute after a system reboot. One sets the fan speed to 100%, and then overclocks my GPUs, one to initialize the miner, and the last one to monitor temps.
Edit: I found this http://sourceforge.net/projects/amdovdrvctrl/?source=navbar (http://sourceforge.net/projects/amdovdrvctrl/?source=navbar), I'll give it a try once I get home. It was last update Dec 13 2013.
-
hi all, how can I fix this?
290X with amd_13_12_catalyst_64bit_whql
thx alot
[...]
Connection attempt failed, retry in 45 seconds
Connection attempt failed, retry in 45 seconds
Obviously, the miner cannot connect to ypool.net. Is your internet connection OK?
-
question to the developer:
what about a back-up-pool-solution
now i'm awake and it is possible to change the beeeeeer-pool to ypool
but it is a problem when i'm not on
maybe there could be a switch after 2 mins without work at one pool - then the miner changes the pool
it is only a bit longer path to set like in cgminer to have the back-up-pools
the big work is not to set the bat-line, but to code this functionally ;)
-
Now THAT is quite the find! I can't wait to give that a shot when I get home as well!
Right now my solution is to run cgminer in a shell in which I immediately disable all
the GPU's by hand (haven't figured out a way to do that in a cgminer.conf). This allows
me to monitor GPU temps and FAN speeds... plus have control over other GPU parameters
if I want, but again this is mostly to monitor. The cgminer.conf I run when I start cgminer
has all my tweaks. Just thought I'd pass this out as a work around, albeit a little messy.
Edit: I found this http://sourceforge.net/projects/amdovdrvctrl/?source=navbar (http://sourceforge.net/projects/amdovdrvctrl/?source=navbar), I'll give it a try once I get home. It was last update Dec 13 2013.
-
question to the developer:
what about a back-up-pool-solution
now i'm awake and it is possible to change the beeeeeer-pool to ypool
but it is a problem when i'm not on
maybe there could be a switch after 2 mins without work at one pool - then the miner changes the pool
it is only a bit longer path to set like in cgminer to have the back-up-pools
the big work is not to set the bat-line, but to code this functionally ;)
I'm working on it. But this requires some development time because I have to join multiple code branches and my implementation of the xpt protocol v5 is still not working. If there is a beta available I will announce it.
-
I have a question for NaN about this but in a different light.
Since we can start two threads on our GPUs (those that can)
would it be possible to mine at Ypool and Beeeeer at the same
time by running clpts-v0.1.x as one thread on all the GPUs and
then clots-v.02.x as one thread on all the GPUs. I would think
it's possible though you'd be mining half speed to each pool BUT
you'd be covering both bases at the same time. Just an idea/thought
that came to mind.... please, no flames :-)
question to the developer:
what about a back-up-pool-solution
now i'm awake and it is possible to change the beeeeeer-pool to ypool
but it is a problem when i'm not on
maybe there could be a switch after 2 mins without work at one pool - then the miner changes the pool
it is only a bit longer path to set like in cgminer to have the back-up-pools
the big work is not to set the bat-line, but to code this functionally ;)
I'm working on it. But this requires some development time because I have to join multiple code branches and my implementation of the xpt protocol v5 is still not working. If there is a beta available I will announce it.
-
running 6 gpu on one motherboard is very easy to burn your ATX connector on mother board since each pcie slot will draw 75w from motherboard. if you want to put more than 4 cards on same motherboard ,you need to use powered riser for pcie
I am using powered risers... they are the USB style with the nice molex on the little board that comes with it... you can also get a PSU like the AXi series from corsair and monitor what each power cord does for each GPU or other connection... its neat... you'll soon see you draw a lot less from PCIe slots than you think on average, most of the power goes through that little cord plugged into the GPU... some GPU's from sapphire now come with two 8pin plugs so almost all power goes through the PSU direct...
-
@mbender71: I've never tried that because I always tested with a multiple GPU setup. But I think it should work.
-
My rig has 4 x R9 290's (soon to be 5 x R9 290's when I get home) and since
switching to Linux yesterday the multiple threads work great for that little *oomph*
in computing power. Another way to look at my unique idea is to run certain GPUs
(multiple thread) on Ypool and then run the remaining GPUs (multiple thread) on
Beeeer, essentially devoting a GPU card to a pool. This is great for those with even
amount of GPU cards which I will NOT have when my fifth arrives today....
Just thinking out loud.... :-)
@mbender71: I've never tried that because I always tested with a multiple GPU setup. But I think it should work.
-
My rig has 4 x R9 290's (soon to be 5 x R9 290's when I get home) and since
switching to Linux yesterday the multiple threads work great for that little *oomph*
in computing power. Another way to look at my unique idea is to run certain GPUs
(multiple thread) on Ypool and then run the remaining GPUs (multiple thread) on
Beeeer, essentially devoting a GPU card to a pool. This is great for those with even
amount of GPU cards which I will NOT have when my fifth arrives today....
Just thinking out loud.... :-)
@mbender71: I've never tried that because I always tested with a multiple GPU setup. But I think it should work.
Whats the problem with running an ODD number of GPUs?
-
None at all. I was just saying that if wanted to mine at two different pools
at the same time by running two separate threads on each GPU (one to Ypool
and one to Beeeeer) then ODD number is just fine. If you wanted to devote
GPU's to the both pools and have an ODD number of GPUs then obviously you'll
have one extra card to either pool..... UNLESS you split that one ODD card with
two threads with each thread going to a different pool. It's just configurations
and honestly I'm not sure if there are gains at ALL to be made by mine both
simultaneously. Technically you would be mining against yourself since everyone
is searching for the same "next block" (unless they are sneakily doing the 51%+
flaw) but at least you're guaranteed some share time instead of loosing all your
share time if the block is not found. In a perfect world if only two pools existed
then you'd be getting shares for each block found.... but....... :-) :-)
again, just thinking out loud! no flames please!
Whats the problem with running an ODD number of GPUs?
-
None at all. I was just saying that if wanted to mine at two different pools
at the same time by running two separate threads on each GPU (one to Ypool
and one to Beeeeer) then ODD number is just fine. If you wanted to devote
GPU's to the both pools and have an ODD number of GPUs then obviously you'll
have one extra card to either pool..... UNLESS you split that one ODD card with
two threads with each thread going to a different pool. It's just configurations
and honestly I'm not sure if there are gains at ALL to be made by mine both
simultaneously. Technically you would be mining against yourself since everyone
is searching for the same "next block" (unless they are sneakily doing the 51%+
flaw) but at least you're guaranteed some share time instead of loosing all your
share time if the block is not found. In a perfect world if only two pools existed
then you'd be getting shares for each block found.... but....... :-) :-)
again, just thinking out loud! no flames please!
Whats the problem with running an ODD number of GPUs?
Ah I understand, just making sure there wasn't some issue running an odd number of GPUs
-
Can confirm behaviours that others have seen. Using Win7x64 and latest versions of 0.1.x and 0.2.x. for 7850 and 7990 cards I use about 1% CPU with -t 0. with -t 0,0 CPU increases to 50% and CPM is less than -t 0. Also see miner using 500MB mem sometimes. Not a big deal as am perfectly happy with results from -t 0.
-
My rig has 4 x R9 290's (soon to be 5 x R9 290's when I get home) and since
switching to Linux yesterday the multiple threads work great for that little *oomph*
in computing power. Another way to look at my unique idea is to run certain GPUs
(multiple thread) on Ypool and then run the remaining GPUs (multiple thread) on
Beeeer, essentially devoting a GPU card to a pool. This is great for those with even
amount of GPU cards which I will NOT have when my fifth arrives today....
Just thinking out loud.... :-)
@mbender71: I've never tried that because I always tested with a multiple GPU setup. But I think it should work.
What is your cpm with 4 R9 290?
-
From my post a day or so ago :
I think I finally have my 4 x MSI R9 290 rig setup under Ubuntu running clpts v0.2.2
with all the tweaks for now. Currently mining on Ypool at the moment and getting :
collisions/min : 15130
shares/hr : 1730
The total rig is pulling 1100w with a 20" box fan running on low to keep air circulating.
What is your cpm with 4 R9 290?
-
From my post a day or so ago :
I think I finally have my 4 x MSI R9 290 rig setup under Ubuntu running clpts v0.2.2
with all the tweaks for now. Currently mining on Ypool at the moment and getting :
collisions/min : 15130
shares/hr : 1730
The total rig is pulling 1100w with a 20" box fan running on low to keep air circulating.
What is your cpm with 4 R9 290?
it pains me that I can't get the 64bit version of ubuntu installed on my intel board... I want to try ubuntu and clpts but it looks like the only linux version is 64bit so the 32bit ubuntu I have now will do me no good! jealousy!
-
After last updates from mircrosoft win 7 64 bit.. miner 0.1.4 got problems with my 270X... I had to reverse to 0.1.2.. catalyst 13.12.. my 290X is still ok. with 0.1.4
-
hi all, how can I fix this?
290X with amd_13_12_catalyst_64bit_whql
thx alot
[...]
Connection attempt failed, retry in 45 seconds
Connection attempt failed, retry in 45 seconds
Obviously, the miner cannot connect to ypool.net. Is your internet connection OK?
my internet connection is OK, I can use other miners(such as yam's CPU miner or abs123's gpu miner ) connect to ypool.net.
only this miner doesn't work.
I alse tried v0.1, It cannot connect to beeeeer.org too,
I'm in china, dose Great Fire Wall block something?
-
Great !
Success install in Ubuntu linux 13.10 .
With 3x 7970 the cpm = 7430 !
But not working in Ubuntu 12.04.
-
From my post a day or so ago :
I think I finally have my 4 x MSI R9 290 rig setup under Ubuntu running clpts v0.2.2
with all the tweaks for now. Currently mining on Ypool at the moment and getting :
collisions/min : 15130
shares/hr : 1730
The total rig is pulling 1100w with a 20" box fan running on low to keep air circulating.
What is your cpm with 4 R9 290?
Nice!! Thanks for the info. I'm thinking of buying a couple R9 290 if I can't find any cheap 290X. The problem is that even R9 290 are in the $600 range......:(
-
No problem! Actually I managed to snag another MSI R9 290 from NewEgg earlier this
week and it came in yesterday. Yeah, the price gouging is getting rough as I paid $25
more for this single one than I did the other 4 from the same seller! I also got rid of
the 20" box fan and purchased 4 200mm 110 cfm fans to lower the noise level.
So now the rig is as follows:
5 x MSI R9 290 running Ubuntu 13.04 & clpts v0.2.2.
Currently mining on Ypool at the moment and getting :
collisions/min : 18908
shares/hr : 2192
The total rig is pulling 1300w.
Nice!! Thanks for the info. I'm thinking of buying a couple R9 290 if I can't find any cheap 290X. The problem is that even R9 290 are in the $600 range......:(
-
No problem! Actually I managed to snag another MSI R9 290 from NewEgg earlier this
week and it came in yesterday. Yeah, the price gouging is getting rough as I paid $25
more for this single one than I did the other 4 from the same seller! I also got rid of
the 20" box fan and purchased 4 200mm 110 cfm fans to lower the noise level.
So now the rig is as follows:
5 x MSI R9 290 running Ubuntu 13.04 & clpts v0.2.2.
Currently mining on Ypool at the moment and getting :
collisions/min : 18908
shares/hr : 2192
The total rig is pulling 1300w.
Nice!! Thanks for the info. I'm thinking of buying a couple R9 290 if I can't find any cheap 290X. The problem is that even R9 290 are in the $600 range......:(
Yea I got lucky and I managed to get these 4x R9 290X for $599 ea off Amazon.
Aside from my 4x R9 290X I have 3 GTX 780 which are pulling a measly 6500 cpm together....I bought those last year before I planned on mining. *shrug*
Now I'm just creeping around Amazon, Newegg, Tigerdirect, and Ebay until i find some rightly priced R9 290(x).
Edit: What temp are your cards running at? I just bought some 1x to 16x powered PCIE adapters and I think I'm going to pull out all but one of my GPU(s) from the case. The second card is making my top card run at 80C - 85C at all times with Fans @ 100%.....while second card stays at 60C-65C.
-
You indeed ARE a lucky person to have grabbed those 290X's for so cheap! Everyone
is in the mining craze (which is good/bad) and so many of the cards are hard to get,
well except for the 290X as the price is so high that profitability isn't there for the
performance.
First question is if you bought a reference cooler design or did you buy a GPU card
with an advanced cooler design, such as MSI Gamer card with twin fans and special
radiator? The reference design cooling system is awful and it will be very hard to
keep them cool while running high performance tweaks. Fortunately, NaN has very
optimized software that provides GREAT performance with much less power consumption
than cgminer (not a super fair comparison since one is MOMENTUM mining and the other
is SCRYPT mining). NaN keeps pushing the envelope though and each revision is faster
but does consume a little more power. Still WAY better than SCRYPT performance though.
The key to high performance is great power supplies (I use two Seasonic 860 Platinums)
using the proper PSU coupler (amazon for $29) and more importantly a good plan for
cooling. First step is to forget mining inside a case. Get yourself large plastic crates or a
wireframe rack. Next is to space out the GPUs properly! The farther apart they are, the
better. Actually the BEST thing you can do is make sure there is nothing in front of the
intake fans on the GPUs, that is the fans are pulling in fresh room air and NOT preheated
air from the GPU next to it. Having all the GPU's next to each other produces the cascading
heat effect where the GPU on the furthest right runs super cool as nothing is in front of it.
The next GPU gets pre-heated air from the GPU to the right of it, and so on and so on until
the furthest card on the left is running super hot. Same principal applies in cases but from
top to bottom.
Having said that, use some ingenuity to keep those GPU's cool! My goal is to keep them
under 80C while running full steam and better yet, keep them 70C or lower. It *CAN* be
done but requires some thinking *smile*. Keep the GPU fans running 85% or higher as
that is your first line of defense (closest to gpu/radiator) to keeping temps down. Sure it's
loud but you're mining.... PROTECT YOUR INVESTMENT.... second line of defense it to keep
cool air in front of the GPU fans.
Good luck!
Yea I got lucky and I managed to get these 4x R9 290X for $599 ea off Amazon.
Aside from my 4x R9 290X I have 3 GTX 780 which are pulling a measly 6500 cpm together....I bought those last year before I planned on mining. *shrug*
Now I'm just creeping around Amazon, Newegg, Tigerdirect, and Ebay until i find some rightly priced R9 290(x).
Edit: What temp are your cards running at? I just bought some 1x to 16x powered PCIE adapters and I think I'm going to pull out all but one of my GPU(s) from the case. The second card is making my top card run at 80C - 85C at all times with Fans @ 100%.....while second card stays at 60C-65C.
-
So now the rig is as follows:
5 x MSI R9 290 running Ubuntu 13.04 & clpts v0.2.2.
Currently mining on Ypool at the moment and getting :
collisions/min : 18908
shares/hr : 2192
The total rig is pulling 1300w.
Hey I was just thinking about this... 2191 is your shares per HOUR right? which comes out to roughly 36 a MINUTE? this seems awfully low to me if I am reading it right... I was tinkering around with 6 x R9 270 cards and was getting 8600 cpm and 33 shares per minute... and thats after it was running overnight for a good 12 hours so it wasn't a quick burst...
I'm wondering if there some difference in whats displayed in windows 64bit 0.1.4 at beeeeer and the version you are running on ubuntu over at ypool? I mean am I accurate, or are you accurate? if we're both accurate, something can't be right lol.
[STATS] 2014-Feb-14 17:54:47 | 8593.08 c/m | 33.35 sh/m | VL: 603 (97.89%), RJ: 13 (2.11%), ST: 0 (0.00%)
am I translating the sh/m correctly into sh/h ? 33.35 x 60 minutes = 2001 shares/hr for me?
which would mean at half the cpm I am almost equal to your shares?
Sometimes I wish english was my first language, I always feel like I am wrong.
========
(answer found: turns out ypool and beeeeer have different difficulty settings, so shares won't always match)
-
beeeeer.org and ypool.net have different share difficulties, so everything is ok. At the moment the beeeeer client shows a share target of 0x00fff..., which translates to <shares per minute> ~ <cpm> / 256 and for ypool we currently have <shares/h> ~< cpm> / 512 * 60 ignoring statistical uncertainties. Please note that the share difficulty can be changed any time by the pool operator.
-
beeeeer.org and ypool.net have different share difficulties, so everything is ok. At the moment the beeeeer client shows a share target of 0x00fff..., which translates to <shares per minute> ~ <cpm> / 256 and for ypool we currently have <shares/h> ~< cpm> / 512 * 60 ignoring statistical uncertainties. Please note that the share difficulty can be changed any time by the pool operator.
Well that makes the math much easier... so essentially the shares/minute/hour seems to average out to equal CPM based upon the difficulty of 256/512... so we really should only be judging by the CPM as a comparison when we're trading numbers with folks?
-
Bug reported to developer.
I have 4 r9 290x running on ubuntu 12.10. The driver is 13.12 linux. I tried to run clptes but have an error message.
error in xptMiner/clInit.cpp, line 96: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)
Any idea to fix it?
-
I think I've seen this error before after the AMD drivers crash. First I would check to
see if the AMD drivers are seeing all of your video cards properly :
aticonfig --list-adapters
If you see your adapters then I suggest shutting down your machine and restarting.
Strange things happen when the AMD drivers fail and the only way to get things back
on track is a shutdown/restart of the box. Hope this helps a little.
(I'm running Ubuntu 13.04 x64 kernel 3.8.0-35 with AMD Catalyst 13.12 + 5 x R9 290)
Bug reported to developer.
I have 4 r9 290x running on ubuntu 12.10. The driver is 13.12 linux. I tried to run clptes but have an error message.
error in xptMiner/clInit.cpp, line 96: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)
Any idea to fix it?
-
I have seen someone talking of getting 3.5K CPM on a 280X. Has anyone ever heard of that?
BTW, AMAZING job on this miner! Keep it coming!!
-
I have seen someone talking of getting 3.5K CPM on a 280X. Has anyone ever heard of that?
BTW, AMAZING job on this miner! Keep it coming!!
W7-64-Cata 13.12 / 280X / 1125 core / 1500 mem / 3450 cpm
this 280X-cards are a dream for windows-mining with this fast NaN-miner
my 290X does about the same - NaN suggested a failure in windows compared to linux for this 290X-numbers
-
I have seen someone talking of getting 3.5K CPM on a 280X. Has anyone ever heard of that?
BTW, AMAZING job on this miner! Keep it coming!!
W7-64-Cata 13.12 / 280X / 1125 core / 1500 mem / 3450 cpm
this 280X-cards are a dream for windows-mining with this fast NaN-miner
my 290X does about the same - NaN suggested a failure in windows compared to linux for this 290X-numbers
Wow 3450? I'm only getting 2450 on Windows 8 / 14.1 beta drivers...
-
Beeeeer Vs YPool
A little off topic but not so much when NaN's incredible miner only works on these two pools.
I used to mine @ Be^5r a week ago but it seems like they are either offline higher than usual
and now the time between solved blocks is increasing (perhaps due to less miners and technical
difficulties like DDoS). YPool has been pretty darn steady the past three days until yesterday when
clpts says it disconnected, will wait 45 seconds, and then just exit out to the command line.
NaN : How do you handle disconnects from the server? Do you only try one time after 45 seconds
and then just exit out? Last night it happened twice to me and fortunately insomnia had me
restart clpts by hand. Perhaps I should script it to keep trying. I seem to recall someone else
asking about fail-over as well and I suspect this is due to the issues these two pools are having
lately.
Everyone : Which pool do you prefer using, YPool or Be^5r? YPool works so well but I dislike pools
that are too large in fear of block control.
-
I have seen someone talking of getting 3.5K CPM on a 280X. Has anyone ever heard of that?
BTW, AMAZING job on this miner! Keep it coming!!
W7-64-Cata 13.12 / 280X / 1125 core / 1500 mem / 3450 cpm
this 280X-cards are a dream for windows-mining with this fast NaN-miner
my 290X does about the same - NaN suggested a failure in windows compared to linux for this 290X-numbers
Wow 3450? I'm only getting 2450 on Windows 8 / 14.1 beta drivers...
I'm Got on win8 with 13.10 280x/1125/1500/3475CPM it very Great Performance
-
Beeeeer Vs YPool
A little off topic but not so much when NaN's incredible miner only works on these two pools.
I used to mine @ Be^5r a week ago but it seems like they are either offline higher than usual
and now the time between solved blocks is increasing (perhaps due to less miners and technical
difficulties like DDoS). YPool has been pretty darn steady the past three days until yesterday when
clpts says it disconnected, will wait 45 seconds, and then just exit out to the command line.
NaN : How do you handle disconnects from the server? Do you only try one time after 45 seconds
and then just exit out? Last night it happened twice to me and fortunately insomnia had me
restart clpts by hand. Perhaps I should script it to keep trying. I seem to recall someone else
asking about fail-over as well and I suspect this is due to the issues these two pools are having
lately.
Everyone : Which pool do you prefer using, YPool or Be^5r? YPool works so well but I dislike pools
that are too large in fear of block control.
Did you use last version ?? i'm run on win8 it normal not onetime reconnect and out
-
I have seen someone talking of getting 3.5K CPM on a 280X. Has anyone ever heard of that?
BTW, AMAZING job on this miner! Keep it coming!!
W7-64-Cata 13.12 / 280X / 1125 core / 1500 mem / 3450 cpm
this 280X-cards are a dream for windows-mining with this fast NaN-miner
my 290X does about the same - NaN suggested a failure in windows compared to linux for this 290X-numbers
Wow 3450? I'm only getting 2450 on Windows 8 / 14.1 beta drivers...
I'm Got on win8 with 13.10 280x/1125/1500/3475CPM it very Great Performance
Mmm I'll have to try the stable driver release. What flags are you using?
-
I have seen someone talking of getting 3.5K CPM on a 280X. Has anyone ever heard of that?
BTW, AMAZING job on this miner! Keep it coming!!
W7-64-Cata 13.12 / 280X / 1125 core / 1500 mem / 3450 cpm
this 280X-cards are a dream for windows-mining with this fast NaN-miner
my 290X does about the same - NaN suggested a failure in windows compared to linux for this 290X-numbers
Wow 3450? I'm only getting 2450 on Windows 8 / 14.1 beta drivers...
I'm Got on win8 with 13.10 280x/1125/1500/3475CPM it very Great Performance
Mmm I'll have to try the stable driver release. What flags are you using?
did you run with 2Thread and -a 1 ??
-
Beeeeer Vs YPool
A little off topic but not so much when NaN's incredible miner only works on these two pools.
I used to mine @ Be^5r a week ago but it seems like they are either offline higher than usual
and now the time between solved blocks is increasing (perhaps due to less miners and technical
difficulties like DDoS). YPool has been pretty darn steady the past three days until yesterday when
clpts says it disconnected, will wait 45 seconds, and then just exit out to the command line.
NaN : How do you handle disconnects from the server? Do you only try one time after 45 seconds
and then just exit out? Last night it happened twice to me and fortunately insomnia had me
restart clpts by hand. Perhaps I should script it to keep trying. I seem to recall someone else
asking about fail-over as well and I suspect this is due to the issues these two pools are having
lately.
Everyone : Which pool do you prefer using, YPool or Be^5r? YPool works so well but I dislike pools
that are too large in fear of block control.
Did you use last version ?? i'm run on win8 it normal not onetime reconnect and out
Yes... I'm using v.0.2.2 and it's been working wonderful until last night. Right now I'm giving be^5r
a shot but goodness, they are sometimes like 3 hours between block solves! Still waiting. Who knows,
perhaps my ISP was just having problems last night and it was me.. but still I was surprised that clpts
would just exit out (cleanly).
-
did you run with 2Thread and -a 1 ??
This is what I'm using right now:
-p x -t 0,1,3 -a 1
-
did you run with 2Thread and -a 1 ??
This is what I'm using right now:
-p x -t 0,1,3 -a 1
Change Driver and try
-px -t 0.0,1,1,3 -a 1
-
did you run with 2Thread and -a 1 ??
This is what I'm using right now:
-p x -t 0,1,3 -a 1
Change Driver and try
-px -t 0.0,1,1,3 -a 1
Will do. Should also mention this card is not overclocked, mostly because when I do I don't see a CPM change. Just continues to chill at 2647.
-
My Gigabyte is already factory OCed to 1100/1500. And I'm undervolting it.
Could you tell me how would I set my .bat for one GPU mining? Well, actually I have a 780Ti but I'm not using it for mining, only the R9 280x.
Thank you very much!!
Also, using AMD SDK 2.9 and Catalyst 13.11 on Win8 64
Edit: With -t 0,0 I'm getting only 800 CPM :/
-
13.12 getting 3500!!! Yesssss
-t 0,0
Changfe your catalyst to it and try!
-
Change Driver and try
-px -t 0.0,1,1,3 -a 1
13.12 getting 3500!!! Yesssss
-t 0,0
Changfe your catalyst to it and try!
yessssssssssssssssssss, changed to:
-p x -t 0,0,1,1,3 -a 1
Sitting at ~3400 right now. Thank you both very much.
-
Change Driver and try
-px -t 0.0,1,1,3 -a 1
13.12 getting 3500!!! Yesssss
-t 0,0
Changfe your catalyst to it and try!
yessssssssssssssssssss, changed to:
-p x -t 0,0,1,1,3 -a 1
Sitting at ~3400 right now. Thank you both very much.
You Change to 13.12 ?
-
You Change to 13.2 ?
Yep.
-
You Change to 13.2 ?
Yep.
I will test it Nice
-
I think I saw this somewhere on this thread;
I have a 5770 on Ubuntu that I've been trying to test before putting my 290's on it. I cannot get the miner to work on the 5770. This is normal right? I was trying and failing but then remembered I thought I read in here that HD 5 series cards won't work on Ubuntu but will work in windows. I am curious as I did have it working with this miner in Windows.
So just to clarify can the 5770 mine using this miner in Ubuntu?
-
@battleaxe: A 5770 card won't work with Ubuntu or any other Linux distribution since it will fail to allocate the device memory. You need a card with at least 2GB RAM.
-
My Gigabyte is already factory OCed to 1100/1500. And I'm undervolting it.
Could you tell me how would I set my .bat for one GPU mining? Well, actually I have a 780Ti but I'm not using it for mining, only the R9 280x.
Thank you very much!!
Also, using AMD SDK 2.9 and Catalyst 13.11 on Win8 64
Edit: With -t 0,0 I'm getting only 800 CPM :/
What are you undervolting the card to with success? I seem to have the same gigabyte card (1100/1500 factory set overclock) at 3500cpm on two threads but goodness that sure do give a lot of heat... still stays at 60 degrees with the three fans spinning hard... but if I undervolting works well for you I'd like to try the same setting...
-
It would be nice to have a 32-bit linux version that we could on BAMT :)
-
@battleaxe: A 5770 card won't work with Ubuntu or any other Linux distribution since it will fail to allocate the device memory. You need a card with at least 2GB RAM.
Okay. Thank you for confirming this.
-
What are you undervolting the card to with success? I seem to have the same gigabyte card (1100/1500 factory set overclock) at 3500cpm on two threads but goodness that sure do give a lot of heat... still stays at 60 degrees with the three fans spinning hard... but if I undervolting works well for you I'd like to try the same setting...
[/quote]
1094 with success. I think it can go a step lower still, but I'm testing this way, and it's made some good different in C and Watts. But 60C isn't hot man, here I'm running it at 70C!
-
1094 with success. I think it can go a step lower still, but I'm testing this way, and it's made some good different in C and Watts. But 60C isn't hot man, here I'm running it at 70C!
Yes 60C is not "hot" I guess, but 50C is better ;)
once you add in energy savings too that is the bonus, once you pay for hardware, only cost is energy... reduce cost increase return... thank you for your information, now I just have to figure out the safe way to change BIOS as it seems these cards are locked and using a windows program does not work...
-
Wow prices for amd cards are absolutely silly right now in the usa. Prices in Holland are fine here. So if anyone wants some help sourcing a couple of 270€ 280x cards :)
-
So I'm using Catalyst 13.12 and 2x R9 290X with the following -t 0,0,1,1 -a 1 (tried 0,2,3)
And I'm hovering around 6200-6300 C/M. If I launch more than 1 window the first window will slowly begin loosing C/M. It seems I cannot run Multi Thread on the 290X any suggestions?
It spawns 4 workers but the performance is the same as if I just ran -t 0,1.
-
So I'm using Catalyst 13.12 and 2x R9 290X with the following -t 0,0,1,1 -a 1 (tried 0,2,3)
And I'm hovering around 6200-6300 C/M. If I launch more than 1 window the first window will slowly begin loosing C/M. It seems I cannot run Multi Thread on the 290X any suggestions?
It spawns 4 workers but the performance is the same as if I just ran -t 0,1.
Switch to a Linux Distro.
-
did you run with 2Thread and -a 1 ??
This is what I'm using right now:
-p x -t 0,1,3 -a 1
Change Driver and try
-px -t 0.0,1,1,3 -a 1
Will do. Should also mention this card is not overclocked, mostly because when I do I don't see a CPM change. Just continues to chill at 2647.
hrm
I'm running a 7970 in Windows 7 with -t 0 -a 3 @ 2700cpm, underclocked to hell and voltage approaching performance level 1 levels
the 270 is -t 1 -a 1 @ 1500cpm and also underclocked, temps @ 52oC and 57oC respectively
but I was thinking -t was something else, so i haven't even tried the 7970 with 2 threads or whatever? nfc. too lazy to right now
-
win7 64 amd13.12
280x 3100, but 290 only 2800?
I released a fast OpenCL PTS-miner for AMD GPUs. The performance is 3100+ c/m on a R9 280X and 1300+ c/m on a 7870, so that this seems to be the fastest released miner. Binaries are available for Windows and 64bit-Linux.
DOWNLOAD v0.1.x: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/d5qvec5kxlug1bm/FR3Y_78Eag connects to the beeeeer.org pool, which has 2.5% pool fees. The developer fees for this version are 7/367 ~ 1.9%.
DOWNLOAD v0.2.x: https://www.dropbox.com/sh/1ioh00043hqbsbk/wTptW3dr22 connects to the ypool.net pool, which has 5% pool fees. The developer fees for this version are 2.5% to make smaller pools more attractive. The developer fees are automatically transferred by ypool.net to the developer so the user's miner does not need to reconnect to support the developer.
UPDATE 10: version v0.2 of the miner is released, which supports the pool on ypool.net. If you want to connect to beeeeer.org you should use v.0.1.2. The miner does NOT support the 1GH-pool yet because the pool does not implement the latest xpt-protocol but 1GH-pool support is still planned. EDIT There was a typo in the README. The usage of v0.2 is <exe-name> -u <username>.<worker> -p <pass> -t <GPU DeviceID list>
UPDATE 12: I released a new version with large performance improvements. The syntax of the command line options of v0.1.x has changed and one has to specify the device IDs like in v0.2.x (see README). Furthermore, the command line option -a was introduced to select an algorithm. I guess that -a 0 or -a 2 should be fastest on R9 290(X) and -a 1 or -a 3 should be best for non-R9 290(X) cards.
known issues: The miner does not run if the installed Catalyst driver is too old. Multi-GPU support works for most users but sometimes the miner won't work if there are different cards installed. Then you have to run an instance of the miner on each card. The miner is not optimized to run on 5000 and 6000 series GPUs and needs about 1.2GB free GPU RAM.
NOTE 1: When you post errors I appreciate some information about the operating system (Windows or Linux / 32bit or 64bit is sufficient) and the used Catalyst driver. Furthermore you should suppress the section between the stars of the output of the miner excluding the miner version (at the moment it hasn't any relevance but it will become important in the future).
NOTE 2: Please make sure that you are not using an outdated Catalyst version and read the README.
I would be grateful for donations to speed up the development of a version for Nvidia GPUs and 1GH-pool support:
PTS: Pk3mHjZrW3HGmx5jMNaN1GhXT2WgXHjRCz
BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
-
win7 64 amd13.12
280x 3100, but 290 only 2800?
With Linux you will get much more out of the R9 290. Most likely this a Windows Catalyst driver issue.
-
yeah... ubuntu 12.04 LTS
2x r9 290 @ 1125/1400
1x r9 290 @ stock
~12000 cpm
oh, and my cards are always slower with -a 1 than with -a 0. don't know why ...
-
yeah... ubuntu 12.04 LTS
2x r9 290 @ 1125/1400
1x r9 290 @ stock
~12000 cpm
oh, and my cards are always slower with -a 1 than with -a 0. don't know why ...
-a 0 is indeed fastest for R9 290 in Linux.
-
Whoa! Didn't discover the recent release until yesterday. Thanks for this massive boost in performance! This is amazing stuff.
Edit: Forgot to mention that I'm using W7 x64, 4 GB RAM, Catalyst 14.1 beta (same performance as 13.12).
5 280X cards in total: (3x R9 280X ASUS DC2T, 1x R9 Gigabyte Windforce 3X and 1x Sapphire Dual-X OC). Total CPM jumped from 10900 CPM to 17100 CPM (~3400 CPM each) with 2 threads but without any extra flags. Each card is running 1100/1500 @ stock voltage right now. Will try with -a 1 and so on.
I did run into an issue that others might need the solution for. On rig #1 (W7 x64 / 4GB RAM), when running 2 threads on all 4 cards the miner would either shutdown, crash or freeze my PC. It would run 3 cards with 2 threads each, but once the 4th card attempted to use 2 threads an error message including some message about memory would pop up.
I eventually realized that the problem was my page file. The initial size was set to 6141MB and the max 8192MB. I doubled both of these values and was able to run all 4 cards with 2 threads each and no issues!
Sent a small amount of PTS for your continued invested time in this project of yours. Will continue doing so as the PTS keeps rolling in. 8)
-
yeah... ubuntu 12.04 LTS
2x r9 290 @ 1125/1400
1x r9 290 @ stock
~12000 cpm
oh, and my cards are always slower with -a 1 than with -a 0. don't know why ...
-a 0 is indeed fastest for R9 290 in Linux.
Think there will be a fix for the Windows side of things? At the moment I have my mining rig on linux only because how much better your miner performs on the OS with 290x's. The lack of overclocking utilities and support for the Hawaii cards on linux is pretty underwhelming though.
Does anyone know how to change GPU voltages on nix for Hawaii cards or even how to monitor current voltages? At the moment all I can control are clocks/mem/powertune/fan.
-
Win7 64 - 2x 280x@1170/1800: 7070cpm!!!
-
A strange thing: if i run my dual 280x right after login (win7x64) with -t 0,0,1,1 it runs fine with 7070 cpm and not "lagged" monitor at gpu 1. if i run cgminer (scrypt) before (and stop this of course), then i can not run at -t 0,0,1,1. Monitor gets heavy lag and mouse is not usable any more, very hard to close miner-window, cpm is down at ~4000. Problem is only the GPU with monitor attached, other one is fine, So i have to run with -t 0,0,1 (3 threads) only after scrypting. Maybe cgminer leaves a mess in gpu, maybe it´s a memory allocation problem in gpu-memory because of graphics? I´m a noob, but is it possible to init gpu (-memory) after start of your miner?
-
A strange thing: if i run my dual 280x right after login (win7x64) with -t 0,0,1,1 it runs fine with 7070 cpm and not "lagged" monitor at gpu 1. if i run cgminer (scrypt) before (and stop this of course), then i can not run at -t 0,0,1,1. Monitor gets heavy lag and mouse is not usable any more, very hard to close miner-window, cpm is down at ~4000. Problem is only the GPU with monitor attached, other one is fine, So i have to run with -t 0,0,1 (3 threads) only after scrypting. Maybe cgminer leaves a mess in gpu, maybe it´s a memory allocation problem in gpu-memory because of graphics? I´m a noob, but is it possible to init gpu (-memory) after start of your miner?
having a similiar problem here with Win7 64, R9 270x and 13.12 driver. if i start the miner directly after login i get 1350 cpm. If i start the miner after cgminer was launched and stoped i get around 560 cpm...i don´t care about that, but it might be interesting for other people testing and wondering about the low hash rate.
-
I have previously reported some windows updates changed some of the performance of the 0.1.4 version... but I got mistaken by the fact that I am using the second GPU for my monitor... and the AMD driver has a "flaw" (in my opinion...) that when the first card to be detected over the PCIe has no Display adapter connected to the RAMDAC... it does not "turn on the full potential of the GPU"...
Workaround:
Simple connect a display there.. you don't use.. or plug-in and plug-out the other card display just to "activate" the RAMDAC...
I had no time to investigate further yet... just reporting.
My drivers are 13.12 (win 7 x86_64)
Just to be sure it's not related to my GPU type, i am using:
PCIe 1: R9 270X
PCIe 2: nothing
PCIe 3: R9 290X (monitor connected)
MOtherboard: ASUS GENE II
NOTE: I guess that while there is no way to say to old BIOS (like X58 chipsets like mine) which is the "main" adapter... where you use your display screen... this will be a problem. But it lacks fixing... as for my logic.. it's considered a driver bug.. to identify the GPU as non-fully-functional...
-
I have previously reported some windows updates changed some of the performance of the 0.1.4 version... but I got mistaken by the fact that I am using the second GPU for my monitor... and the AMD driver has a "flaw" (in my opinion...) that when the first card to be detected over the PCIe has no Display adapter connected to the RAMDAC... it does not "turn on the full potential of the GPU"...
I mean if you walk away from a computer and the monitor turns off, why keep things running and wasting energy, it is a brilliant energy saving feature 99% of people benefit from, except miners... you need a dummy plug that will trick it into thinking there is an actual monitor plugged in... I'm assuming your 270 card probably came with a DVI to VGA adapter of some sort, most seem to, you can use the website below and some simple resistors from an electronics store.
http://rumorscity.com/2013/12/06/how-to-create-dummy-plugs-for-your-graphics-cards/
some people who use certain powered risers, won't need this as the pcboard they connector to their cards will have this built in as a feature...
-
I found this guide on editing your bios to undervolt AMD GPU's on linux. Someone should give it a try and share your results, of course know that this is at your own risk. I am extremely busy with my work and school schedule so I most likely won't get to it this week.
http://www.cryptobadger.com/2013/10/undervolting-in-linux-via-modified-bios/ (http://www.cryptobadger.com/2013/10/undervolting-in-linux-via-modified-bios/)
-
I found this guide on editing your bios to undervolt AMD GPU's on linux. Someone should give it a try and share your results, of course know that this is at your own risk. I am extremely busy with my work and school schedule so I most likely won't get to it this week.
http://www.cryptobadger.com/2013/10/undervolting-in-linux-via-modified-bios/ (http://www.cryptobadger.com/2013/10/undervolting-in-linux-via-modified-bios/)
This is a great article and find but unfortunately it doesn't apply to those with R9 290(x). Perhaps someone will come up with a solution
for those of us with linux + r9 290(x) in the near future. I do know someone that used this mod and it worked great!
-
Just got an error -61.
Anyone know what this means? It has been running fine the past few days. I have windows 7 running a 7970. My computer rebooted for some reason and then I get the error message now.
-
It means CL_INVALID_BUFFER_SIZE. That should not happen with a 7970. What are your command line options and what is your Catalyst driver version?
-
my .bat is clpts_x86-64.exe -u xxxxxx.pts_1 -p xxxxx -t 0,1
everything was working fine the past few day until tonight. i was getting ~1750 col/m on these settings.
-
Do you have only one card? Then -t 0,1 will not work. Please try -t 0 -a 1 or -t 0,0 -a 1 and see which setting is faster. btw 1750 cpm is too slow for a 7970. Is the newest miner version installed?
-
driver 13.251.0.0
yeah after reading through the thread i thought 1700 was rather slow.
only 1 card.
i downloaded from op.
-
still getting error.. line 71: Method clCreateBuffer (...) for binned data failed (errorcode -61) and i removed the 1 from -t
-
Do you have only one card? Then -t 0,1 will not work. Please try -t 0 -a 1 or -t 0,0 -a 1 and see which setting is faster. btw 1750 cpm is too slow for a 7970. Is the newest miner version installed?
Now I am getting -a is not an option message.
-
Please use the latest version, i.e. 0.1.4 for beeeeer.org and 0.2.2 for ypool.net
EDIT Is another miner running on your computer?
-
First, congrats for your very good work. I think the 2.5% fee helps to motivate ;)
Second, I've ran into an issue with 0.2.2 (Didn't test with previous versions) : I can't launch more than 8 threads inside one clpts, have to launch 2 times. Seems related to the lenght of the command line, when I put more than 8 threads, clpts can't authenticate (showing me a weird one char login).
My login is 8 chars, my password 1 char.
Probably a minor issue but if you can have a look, it's probably a 30s fix ;)
Thank you
-
pls anyone help me how to set path clpts_x86-64.exe -u 1.pts_1 -p 123 -t 6798 its correct path? if it wrong please tell me how to correct... im using R9 280X
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 160)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 174)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 167)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 221)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 284)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 291)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
reason invalid worker username
i dono how to set up... i register in ypool.net i want to add the ypool user name?
-
pls anyone help me how to set path clpts_x86-64.exe -u 1.pts_1 -p 123 -t 6798 its correct path? if it wrong please tell me how to correct... im using R9 280X
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 160)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 174)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 167)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 221)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 284)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 291)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
reason invalid worker username
i dono how to set up... i register in ypool.net i want to add the ypool user name?
-t 6798 means Gfx card no 6798.
You need to change that to -t 0 or -t 0,0 is you only use a single 280X.
-
I need some help setting up my miner. I have my 290 on the Ubuntu machine. Can someone help me set it up? I don't know the commands to get it running in as I am very new to Ubuntu. Still learning the process and terminal. Can someone help me?
-
I need some help setting up my miner. I have my 290 on the Ubuntu machine. Can someone help me set it up? I don't know the commands to get it running in as I am very new to Ubuntu. Still learning the process and terminal. Can someone help me?
Not an easy task if you're not familiar with linux, but not impossible. I would suggest YouTube videos on someone setting up Ubuntu mining rigs with AMD cards.. if I recall there is one guy that does a pretty good job though he's geared towards LiteCoin... just do the steps UP to the install of cgminer. Going the Linux route is not the non-techie type. Stick to windows if you want quick & fast install. Good luck!
-
In batch file i have this path only "clpts_x86-64.exe -u 1.pts_1 -p 123 -t 0,0 -a 1" username worker name password all i gave in ypool.net its correct?
-
I need some help setting up my miner. I have my 290 on the Ubuntu machine. Can someone help me set it up? I don't know the commands to get it running in as I am very new to Ubuntu. Still learning the process and terminal. Can someone help me?
Change directory to the folder containing the miner files.
chmod u+x ./clpts
For Be^5r -> ./clpts <address> -t 0,0
For YPool -> ./clpts -u <username>.<worker> -p <workerpassword> -t 0,0
-
I need some help setting up my miner. I have my 290 on the Ubuntu machine. Can someone help me set it up? I don't know the commands to get it running in as I am very new to Ubuntu. Still learning the process and terminal. Can someone help me?
Change directory to the folder containing the miner files.
chmod u+x ./clpts
For Be^5r -> ./clpts <address> -t 0,0
For YPool -> ./clpts -u <username>.<worker> -p <workerpassword>
I apologize if this was all the information you needed. Starting up the miner is the easy part. I was assuming that you
just installed Ubuntu and you haven't installed the AMD catalyst drivers and assured that xorg.conf was setup correctly
(which is kind of the pain in the neck part). If you have 'aticonfig --list-adapters' working and reporting all your GPU's
then you're pretty much good to go!
-
In batch file i have this path only "clpts_x86-64.exe -u 1.pts_1 -p 123 -t 0,0 -a 1" username worker name password all i gave in ypool.net its correct?
You have registered on Ypool, then you go to the "workers" tab and create a worker which you give a name and a password.
You insert the name and password into the scrypt. That is all.
-
I need some help setting up my miner. I have my 290 on the Ubuntu machine. Can someone help me set it up? I don't know the commands to get it running in as I am very new to Ubuntu. Still learning the process and terminal. Can someone help me?
Change directory to the folder containing the miner files.
chmod u+x ./clpts
For Be^5r -> ./clpts <address> -t 0,0
For YPool -> ./clpts -u <username>.<worker> -p <workerpassword>
I apologize if this was all the information you needed. Starting up the miner is the easy part. I was assuming that you
just installed Ubuntu and you haven't installed the AMD catalyst drivers and assured that xorg.conf was setup correctly
(which is kind of the pain in the neck part). If you have 'aticonfig --list-adapters' working and reporting all your GPU's
then you're pretty much good to go!
I read it from a different perspective lol, I assumed he had his drivers set up...If he does then he should be able to just use those commands.
-
my .bat is clpts_x86-64.exe -u xxxxxx.pts_1 -p xxxxx -t 0,1
everything was working fine the past few day until tonight. i was getting ~1750 col/m on these settings.
I am on a 7970, running clpts_x86-64 -u user.1 -p 1 -t 0 -a 3,3
it gets 2800 collisions/m
i guess it can probably go higher, but i haven't really tinkered with the algorithm settings any, or card settings
it's running @ 1100 core 1300 memory , 1.063v, 61oC in ~76oF ambient
ed: and i need to read the readme file, because i'm not even sure if i'm using the -t and -a modifiers properly, scratch. i thought -t specified the device #
-
I think I saw this somewhere on this thread;
I have a 5770 on Ubuntu that I've been trying to test before putting my 290's on it. I cannot get the miner to work on the 5770. This is normal right? I was trying and failing but then remembered I thought I read in here that HD 5 series cards won't work on Ubuntu but will work in windows. I am curious as I did have it working with this miner in Windows.
So just to clarify can the 5770 mine using this miner in Ubuntu?
i had to move some cards around, since ptsgpu won't let me specify the devices to run it on, but will actually work with things like 5830.
so I run this on my 7970, 270's, etc.. and run ptsgpu on the older cards
-
my .bat is clpts_x86-64.exe -u xxxxxx.pts_1 -p xxxxx -t 0,1
everything was working fine the past few day until tonight. i was getting ~1750 col/m on these settings.
I am on a 7970, running clpts_x86-64 -u user.1 -p 1 -t 0 -a 3,3
it gets 2800 collisions/m
i guess it can probably go higher, but i haven't really tinkered with the algorithm settings any, or card settings
it's running @ 1100 core 1300 memory , 1.063v, 61oC in ~76oF ambient
ed: and i need to read the readme file, because i'm not even sure if i'm using the -t and -a modifiers properly, scratch. i thought -t specified the device #
Yes you have -t and -a backwards... -t 3,3 -a 1
this will run two threads on the number 3 GPU... if you have another card to run this on, it might look like 3,3,4 to run two threads on GPU 3 and 1 thread on GPU 4... all depends what you have... I see you must be using gpu 0,1,2 for another miner? just have to get the right GPU ID for the right card...
I've found the -a 1 to be the best setting, but try all of them to see what works best for your card (0,1,2,3), -a 0 is more for the 290 crowd I guess... and yes please read the readme file it has the basic examples folks should be using. :)
-
my .bat is clpts_x86-64.exe -u xxxxxx.pts_1 -p xxxxx -t 0,1
everything was working fine the past few day until tonight. i was getting ~1750 col/m on these settings.
I am on a 7970, running clpts_x86-64 -u user.1 -p 1 -t 0 -a 3,3
it gets 2800 collisions/m
i guess it can probably go higher, but i haven't really tinkered with the algorithm settings any, or card settings
it's running @ 1100 core 1300 memory , 1.063v, 61oC in ~76oF ambient
ed: and i need to read the readme file, because i'm not even sure if i'm using the -t and -a modifiers properly, scratch. i thought -t specified the device #
Yes you have -t and -a backwards... -t 3,3 -a 1
this will run two threads on the number 3 GPU... if you have another card to run this on, it might look like 3,3,4 to run two threads on GPU 3 and 1 thread on GPU 4... all depends what you have... I see you must be using gpu 0,1,2 for another miner? just have to get the right GPU ID for the right card...
I've found the -a 1 to be the best setting, but try all of them to see what works best for your card (0,1,2,3), -a 0 is more for the 290 crowd I guess... and yes please read the readme file it has the basic examples folks should be using. :)
haha, yeah, this is much better. now it's -t 0,0 and -a 1... getting 3500cpm (only a 30 second reading so could be off 10% or so but still much faster than before)
-
Please use the latest version, i.e. 0.1.4 for beeeeer.org and 0.2.2 for ypool.net
EDIT Is another miner running on your computer?
Checked environment variables and GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PERCENT was set at 0. Changed it to 100 percent. Everything is working now. 0.2.2 is giving my 7970 ~2925 col/m. Much faster now!
Thanks for your help!
Maybe remember if somebody has same error to check that setting. Thanks again.
-
I'm having a bear of a time getting my drivers installed for AMD. I have a 290. Been researching on the web for two days now. I know I'm a complete Ubuntu noob, so I"m sure that is the only problem. I like this operating system a lot. Just can't get the drivers and patches to work correctly. And thus can't get the miner to work either. Can someone help me?
-
I'm having a bear of a time getting my drivers installed for AMD. I have a 290. Been researching on the web for two days now. I know I'm a complete Ubuntu noob, so I"m sure that is the only problem. I like this operating system a lot. Just can't get the drivers and patches to work correctly. And thus can't get the miner to work either. Can someone help me?
Sorry to hear about your troubles, but like I said before in my reply to you, this is NOT an easy operating system to just
pick up (from from Windows). You'll have to do lots of research to do this right and my advice that you look on YouTube for
a video to setup a Linux Miner + LiteCoin was the best... really!! Not a lot of hand holding on this forum I'm afraid. If you want
linux that bad you're gonna have to work for it like the rest of us.... or just stick to windows :-) Good luck!
-
I'm having a bear of a time getting my drivers installed for AMD. I have a 290. Been researching on the web for two days now. I know I'm a complete Ubuntu noob, so I"m sure that is the only problem. I like this operating system a lot. Just can't get the drivers and patches to work correctly. And thus can't get the miner to work either. Can someone help me?
One last thing... if you read my posts in this thread you can learn a lot about what versions/combinations
work properly as I went through some headaches myself and I'm a seasoned linux guy. As always, do searches
and READ before asking such general questions.... the answers might be right in front of you and you won't have
to wait for us :-) :-)
-
Okay. Fair enough. I'll keep studying. I want to learn this.
-
Should I add the lines
setx GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PERCENT 100
setx GPU_USE_SYNC_OBJECTS 1
Before the rest of the commands in the .bat? Does this makes any different in this miner?
Thx!
-
THEORETICAL QUESTION
Which would be more efficient, or would it even matter at all :
1) Ypool : run clpts-v0.2.2 with all of your GPUs at once in one window (two threads each GPU)
(i.e. one instance of clpts-v0.2.2)
or
2) Ypool : run clpts-v0.2.2 for EACH GPU in a separate window (two threads each GPU)
(i.e. "n" instances of clpts-v0.2.2)
In the first scenario you have ONE worker on Ypool and on the second you have "n" number of workers.
I guess the question is really geared towards NaN who knows the in's out's of how the AMD drivers thread
and also about how Ypool (or any pool for that matter) distributes blocks to solve. Thanks in advance!
-
Should I add the lines
setx GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PERCENT 100
setx GPU_USE_SYNC_OBJECTS 1
Before the rest of the commands in the .bat? Does this makes any different in this miner?
Thx!
Better yet I'd love for someone to explain what these variables are actually doing. Also, I noticed they are used in various scripts on Linux, do these variables offer the same functions there?
-
Should I add the lines
setx GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PERCENT 100
setx GPU_USE_SYNC_OBJECTS 1
Before the rest of the commands in the .bat? Does this makes any different in this miner?
Thx!
Well. I set up a cgminer bat yesterday and accidentally put GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PERCENT 0 and my GPU would not mine at all even with the PTS miner. It ends up in the environment variables in Windows 7, so its a command that will apply to different programs if you set it for one.
-
Bug reported to developer.
I have 4 r9 290x running on ubuntu 12.10. The driver is 13.12 linux. I tried to run clptes error message.
error in xptMiner/clInit.cpp, line 96: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)
Any idea to fix it?
I have the same error for my 3 R9 290x's as well
"error in xptMiner/clInit.cpp, line 96: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)"
Just wasted my whole day off setting up ubuntu and installing 13.12 drivers with "joshpatten / mining-bootstrap script " and no luck
I'm so frustrated rights now :(
Just dont get it.
All my devices are shown with aticonfig
Reward for Helping!!
Anyone who can guide me to getting my R9 290x's installed and working on any Linux distro, as easy as possible
I will send you a Battlefield 4 Origin Code. I currently have 3 listed on eBay but will pull them off and if I can get some helpful progress to anyone that contributes.
I'm a bit of a noob with Linux so please have detailed info. Your help won't go unnoticed.
(http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NjAwWDgwMA==/z/dLMAAOxyYSdTAYSO/$_3.JPG)
-
Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)
Normally, this error indicates that no X server is running or that the driver does not function properly. Did you run sudo aticonfig --adapter=all --initial (after that you have to reboot) and what does dmesg | grep -i fglrx tell you? Is a X server running (i.e. does ps -A | grep X return anything)? Otherwise you have to execute the binary as root.
-
I’ve tried ubuntu 12.04 many times(with many version catalyst), but no luck.
After reinstall ubuntu 13.10 , all works well.
So I suggest using ubuntu 13.10 .
Bug reported to developer.
I have 4 r9 290x running on ubuntu 12.10. The driver is 13.12 linux. I tried to run clptes error message.
error in xptMiner/clInit.cpp, line 96: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)
Any idea to fix it?
I have the same error for my 3 R9 290x's as well
"error in xptMiner/clInit.cpp, line 96: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)"
Just wasted my whole day off setting up ubuntu and installing 13.12 drivers with "joshpatten / mining-bootstrap script " and no luck
I'm so frustrated rights now :(
Just dont get it.
All my devices are shown with aticonfig
Reward for Helping!!
Anyone who can guide me to getting my R9 290x's installed and working on any Linux distro, as easy as possible
I will send you a Battlefield 4 Origin Code. I currently have 3 listed on eBay but will pull them off and if I can get some helpful progress to anyone that contributes.
I'm a bit of a noob with Linux so please have detailed info. Your help won't go unnoticed.
(http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NjAwWDgwMA==/z/dLMAAOxyYSdTAYSO/$_3.JPG)
-
I found this guide on editing your bios to undervolt AMD GPU's on linux. Someone should give it a try and share your results, of course know that this is at your own risk. I am extremely busy with my work and school schedule so I most likely won't get to it this week.
http://www.cryptobadger.com/2013/10/undervolting-in-linux-via-modified-bios/ (http://www.cryptobadger.com/2013/10/undervolting-in-linux-via-modified-bios/)
This is a great article and find but unfortunately it doesn't apply to those with R9 290(x). Perhaps someone will come up with a solution
for those of us with linux + r9 290(x) in the near future. I do know someone that used this mod and it worked great!
does "radeonvolt" not work on the new cards? that's what i used to use a year ago or so
-
Silly question.
I am running clptsv0.2.2 om ypool.
When I left for work my 280X was running at 2,900 c/m. Now it is only at 2,200 c/m. I restarted it and no difference. didn't change the bat file or anything. Actually my 270, 270X, both 7850's also are running under what they were before.
Would the change in difficulty on ypool affect the c/m? Or might I have something else going on?
Thanks
EDIT: Nevermind I figured it out.
-
Ubuntu 12.04 LTS
amd-catalyst-14.1-betav1.3
My ASUS 280X(OC 1135/1500 , two gpu threads , -a 1) get 3500c/m , 290(OC 1050/1250 , powertune 20% , two gpu threads , -a 0) get 3900 c/m.
Thanks a lot NaN!
-
Which Catalyst driver should I be using for my 290x's under Ubuntu?
-
Bug reported to developer.
I have 4 r9 290x running on ubuntu 12.10. The driver is 13.12 linux. I tried to run clptes error message.
error in xptMiner/clInit.cpp, line 96: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)
Any idea to fix it?
I have the same error for my 3 R9 290x's as well
"error in xptMiner/clInit.cpp, line 96: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)"
Just wasted my whole day off setting up ubuntu and installing 13.12 drivers with "joshpatten / mining-bootstrap script " and no luck
I'm so frustrated rights now :(
Just dont get it.
All my devices are shown with aticonfig
Reward for Helping!!
Anyone who can guide me to getting my R9 290x's installed and working on any Linux distro, as easy as possible
I will send you a Battlefield 4 Origin Code. I currently have 3 listed on eBay but will pull them off and if I can get some helpful progress to anyone that contributes.
I'm a bit of a noob with Linux so please have detailed info. Your help won't go unnoticed.
(http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NjAwWDgwMA==/z/dLMAAOxyYSdTAYSO/$_3.JPG)
I am running Ubuntu 12.10 LTS with AMD Catalyst 14.1 Beta driver.
This error just happened on me today when I run clpts. I test with command: aticonfig --adapter=all --odgt and it show that it can get my 1st R9 290's temperature but fail to get my 2nd R9 290's temperature. Then I tried
command:
sudo aticonfig --adapter=all --initial -f
After the command above and restarting of computer, suddenly it work again :D
I am a newbie to Ubuntu @.@ Not sure but hope this can solve your problem too.
-
Hi guys,
I would like to establish a forecast of profitability. Is someone could help me?
For example, knowing how much is the monthly PTS mining profitability with the same RIG (cpm) speed? Taking into account the rising progressive difficulty. Even for an idea...?
Thank you! ;)
-
http://mrx.im/pts.php?cpm=1750
But you can't plan for expected difficulty there. And it wouldn't matter, because I think it changes over time, so there;s no sure way to know the next difficulty
-
Is Linux-based OS faster for Tahiti-based cards (79XX and 280 cards) as well? I am getting 2700cpm with a 1Ghz 7950 and can't get this number on Ubuntu for some reason...
Thanks!
-
Hi guys,
I would like to establish a forecast of profitability. Is someone could help me?
For example, knowing how much is the monthly PTS mining profitability with the same RIG (cpm) speed? Taking into account the rising progressive difficulty. Even for an idea...?
Thank you! ;)
Also, there's the ever decreasing block reward to keep in mind, as well as the essentially guaranteed price swings coming up in PTS.
-
Has anyone successfully set the GPU voltage using cgminer under linux for a R9 290(X)?
I have my gpu clock, memory, and fan settings where I want them to be but I wouldn't
mind under-volting the GPU to save a little energy and heat. I *believe* cgminer wants
an exact voltage and not a delta but I could be wrong. I don't know what the normal
voltage is for a R9 290 and every attempt to enter an absolute value like 1.25 fails (out
of boundary). Many thanks in advance!
I have been in that same situation for the last two days. I found some good clocks that provide a rather good performance boost in-terms of c/m. I have my 290X's running at 1150/1150. The core increase raised my c/m by ~400, the problem is that I am having some heating issues (80C - 85C - 90C spikes)...I'll try to figure out a way to undervolt on linux, I'll post my solution here if I find anything. If you find something please share.
At the moment I have multiple .sh files that I execute after a system reboot. One sets the fan speed to 100%, and then overclocks my GPUs, one to initialize the miner, and the last one to monitor temps.
Edit: I found this http://sourceforge.net/projects/amdovdrvctrl/?source=navbar (http://sourceforge.net/projects/amdovdrvctrl/?source=navbar), I'll give it a try once I get home. It was last update Dec 13 2013.
how to set the fan speed to 100%? with multiple GPU Fan speed? @ubuntu 12.04
-
how to set the fan speed to 100%? with multiple GPU Fan speed? @ubuntu 12.04
Hint : cgminer..... aticonfig does NOT work under linux with more than one GPU
-
how to set the fan speed to 100%? with multiple GPU Fan speed? @ubuntu 12.04
Hint : cgminer..... aticonfig does NOT work under linux with more than one GPU
It works, just use the following.
export DISPLAY=:0
aticonfig --pplib-cmd "set fanspeed 0 100"
export DISPLAY=:0.1
aticonfig --pplib-cmd "set fanspeed 0 100"
"export DISPLAY=:0.X" --> Change X to whatever GPU you want to change the fan speed on.
-
It works, just use the following.
export DISPLAY=:0
aticonfig --pplib-cmd "set fanspeed 0 100"
export DISPLAY=:0.1
aticonfig --pplib-cmd "set fanspeed 0 100"
"export DISPLAY=:0.X" --> Change X to whatever GPU you want to change the fan speed on.
Woah! I was always using the --adapter=x parameter with aticonfig and couldn't ever get it to
display/set values of anything but the default display. Knowing this will really help! Many thanks
for the education!
-
Think I found the sweet-spot for my cards. The R9 280X ASUS DC2T's are amazing! These results are from 24-48 hours of mining.
W7 64
4GB RAM
3x 280X ASUS DC2T @ 1160/1600 and 1x 280X Gigabyte Windforce 3X @ 1100/1500 with the flags -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 2. Total = 14374 CPM. (Avg is ~3593 CPM.)
Temps are ranging from 62C to 72C at 60% fan-speed with ambient at 25C-30C depending on the time of day. If running 4 instances, one for each card, each card would hit 3300-3400 CPM (why?).
My single 280X Sapphire Dual-X @ 1100/1500 hits 3362 CPM. It has low ASIC rating and fans that apparently are prone to fail; I'm just gonna leave this as is.
-
how to set the fan speed to 100%? with multiple GPU Fan speed? @ubuntu 12.04
Hint : cgminer..... aticonfig does NOT work under linux with more than one GPU
It works, just use the following.
export DISPLAY=:0
aticonfig --pplib-cmd "set fanspeed 0 100"
export DISPLAY=:0.1
aticonfig --pplib-cmd "set fanspeed 0 100"
"export DISPLAY=:0.X" --> Change X to whatever GPU you want to change the fan speed on.
Would this work for overclocking cards like 270's with aticonfig?
-
Think I found the sweet-spot for my cards. The R9 280X ASUS DC2T's are amazing! These results are from 24-48 hours of mining.
W7 64
4GB RAM
3x 280X ASUS DC2T @ 1160/1600 and 1x 280X Gigabyte Windforce 3X @ 1100/1500 with the flags -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 2. Total = 14374 CPM. (Avg is ~3593 CPM.)
You are right! -a 2 seems to be a little bit faster than -a 1, at least at the R9 280X ASUS DC2T. I have only 2 of them, gives me 7350 cpm with -t 0,0,1,1 -a 2
Cards are running at 1200/1800 with special memory-timing bios (Stilt, ASUS_C386PI3_DC2T_SS2_AGR)
-
how to set the fan speed to 100%? with multiple GPU Fan speed? @ubuntu 12.04
Hint : cgminer..... aticonfig does NOT work under linux with more than one GPU
It works, just use the following.
export DISPLAY=:0
aticonfig --pplib-cmd "set fanspeed 0 100"
export DISPLAY=:0.1
aticonfig --pplib-cmd "set fanspeed 0 100"
"export DISPLAY=:0.X" --> Change X to whatever GPU you want to change the fan speed on.
Would this work for overclocking cards like 270's with aticonfig?
I still don't have a proper method for undervolting on Linux. I use the following to overclock core and memory.
aticonfig --adapter=0 --od-setclocks=1140,1500
just change adapter number for different GPU's, also [Core, Memory]
-
R9 270X 4GB <--- 4GB version...
anyone with these 4GB cards, running two threads per card???
out of curiosity I decided to start doing it, and it works out pretty good... its got the memory (with room to spare) to run both threads and I've gotten a roughly 300cpm increase on each card, so I thought I would ask around... I had only been using the 280X cards with two threads, and was wondering why I never saw anyone mention the 4GB 270X cards with two threads, I know most 270 series come with only 2GB and won't do this, but for those with them, what are your results?
guess I will find out in 8 hours how well the results hold...
UPDATE :: well after 8 hours it seems I am getting a 428 cpm increase per card and holding... I guess you really can squeeze a lot out of a 4GB 270X card... almost 2000 cpm per card... (wish the other cards weren't 2GB now)
-
I still don't have a proper method for undervolting on Linux. I use the following to overclock core and memory.
aticonfig --adapter=0 --od-setclocks=1140,1500
just change adapter number for different GPU's, also [Core, Memory]
Is this the correct way to OC? I just used this for my 290x and set the clocks as 1150,1150. I was asked to confirm it and did so using the command supplied. It then displayed overdrive was enabled.
My CPM hasn't changed at all though. Was about 3900 before hand and still is. Using flags -a 0 -t 0,0
Edit: Duh. Need to run the original command again after enabling overdrive.
-
Hi guys,
Not able to reach "normal" score on my side. Only having 3000 cm on the following rig:
Win 8.1
Catalyst 13.12 whql (also tested beta 14 but lower score)
Sapphire r9 290 @1125/1270
-t 0,0 -a 1 (other values do lower score!)
I also have a gtx780 running on the same computer. But dont think it is important... At least I hope xD
Any suggestion please?
-
how to set the fan speed to 100%? with multiple GPU Fan speed? @ubuntu 12.04
Hint : cgminer..... aticonfig does NOT work under linux with more than one GPU
It works, just use the following.
export DISPLAY=:0
aticonfig --pplib-cmd "set fanspeed 0 100"
export DISPLAY=:0.1
aticonfig --pplib-cmd "set fanspeed 0 100"
"export DISPLAY=:0.X" --> Change X to whatever GPU you want to change the fan speed on.
Would this work for overclocking cards like 270's with aticonfig?
I still don't have a proper method for undervolting on Linux. I use the following to overclock core and memory.
aticonfig --adapter=0 --od-setclocks=1140,1500
just change adapter number for different GPU's, also [Core, Memory]
I get the following when using aticonfig to try to overclock my 270's... It may because they are on the same system as my 290x's.
sudo aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-setclocks=1150,1500
invalid input. Please use the following format
"--od-setclocks=<NewCoreClock>,<NewMemoryClock>,<PowerState>,<Performance Level>"
-
I am getting a lot of "share data time overflow".... any ideas ??
-
I get the following when using aticonfig to try to overclock my 270's... It may because they are on the same system as my 290x's.
sudo aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-setclocks=1150,1500
invalid input. Please use the following format
"--od-setclocks=<NewCoreClock>,<NewMemoryClock>,<PowerState>,<Performance Level>"
are you sure the BIOS has 1150 as a valid range on a 270 (non-x) card? I think mine were capped at 1050 in the BIOS... have you tried just raising slightly above regular clock speeds and keep adding on top of that as it works?
-
Can you help me, ypool version has stopped working on Ubuntu 13.10. I am getting following message:
spawning 5 worker threads
Segmentation fault (core dumped)
-
Forget about my plea. I have used wrong command.
-
hi NaN!
we know difficult for protoshares is rised to 0.017247.
just a simple question.
When difficult rise, with same config, cpm go down?
or when difficult rise the cpm remain the same, but i get minus shares/hour?
thank you for the answer!
-
hi NaN!
we know difficult for protoshares is rised to 0.017247.
just a simple question.
When difficult rise, with same config, cpm go down?
or when difficult rise the cpm remain the same, but i get minus shares/hour?
thank you for the answer!
CPM will stay the same at all difficulties. Share difficulty is defined by the pool and will also stay the same. What will change is how hard it is to get a block.
-
Estimated difficulty: 0.02345569 and rising everyday. I guess in 5 days PTS will loose it's profitability with a single R9 280X :/ Those ridiculous 10X R9 290X Litecoin Rigs probably have figured this is the best coin right now.
-
Estimated difficulty: 0.02345569 and rising everyday. I guess in 5 days PTS will loose it's profitability with a single R9 280X :/ Those ridiculous 10X R9 290X Litecoin Rigs probably have figured this is the best coin right now.
Heh, how about the guys with 100 290s? They're loving the 2+ BTC per day.
-
It's all for the best of PTS.. get the chain done... =)
-
but now the price of PTS also go rise :)
-
Hello
3 R9 290 Sapphire
collisions/min: 8486.8750 Shares total: 110
Share found! (Blockheight: 53586)
-a 1 -t 0.0,1,1,2,2
Good ???
-
Hello
3 R9 290 Sapphire
collisions/min: 8486.8750 Shares total: 110
Share found! (Blockheight: 53586)
-a 1 -t 0.0,1,1,2,2
Good ???
With the latest version? No. I get more with 3x 280X. People in this thread have reported speeds of close to 4000 CPM for each card.
Read the last 10 pages and try the various settings and configurations they've posted. Also, in your commandline there is a . instead of , between 0 and 0. By the looks of it, most 290 users get better performance with -a 0 or -a 2.
Try this instead: -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 (try with AND without -a 1, -a 2 and -a 3)
-
What Catalyst drivers are you guys using for Linux?
-
Hello
3 R9 290 Sapphire
collisions/min: 8486.8750 Shares total: 110
Share found! (Blockheight: 53586)
-a 1 -t 0.0,1,1,2,2
Good ???
With the latest version? No. I get more with 3x 280X. People in this thread have reported speeds of close to 4000 CPM for each card.
Read the last 10 pages and try the various settings and configurations they've posted. Also, in your commandline there is a . instead of , between 0 and 0. By the looks of it, most 290 users get better performance with -a 0 or -a 2.
Try this instead: -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 (try with AND without -a 1, -a 2 and -a 3)
If on Windows, you'll probably get around what he's getting.
-
can anyone please help me to set up? i want to start pts mining using x3 sapphire r9 280x dual . i downloaded clpts-v0.1.4_win_x86 ... what config do i need to use? how can i know if my gpu is working? and can i run 3 bat file ? or only 1 bat file will do? please help me..im confused!
-
Please read the README. But I guess that one .bat file with clpts_x86 <your-address> -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 1 will do the job.
-
Please read the README. But I guess that one .bat file with clpts_x86 <your-address> -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 1 will do the job.
Recently, in the further optimization of it? AMD graphics cards has increased dramatically speed also can do?
-
Hello
3 R9 290 Sapphire
collisions/min: 8486.8750 Shares total: 110
Share found! (Blockheight: 53586)
-a 1 -t 0.0,1,1,2,2
Good ???
With the latest version? No. I get more with 3x 280X. People in this thread have reported speeds of close to 4000 CPM for each card.
Read the last 10 pages and try the various settings and configurations they've posted. Also, in your commandline there is a . instead of , between 0 and 0. By the looks of it, most 290 users get better performance with -a 0 or -a 2.
Try this instead: -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 (try with AND without -a 1, -a 2 and -a 3)
Hello Thx reply
Yes Windows 7 64 bits , Drivers 13.12
(http://i.imgur.com/LXg9Wz3.jpg)
-
Make 3 .bat foles, one for each card and run them individually.
-
Hello Guys,
First of all i want to thank you NAN for this beautiful miner.
I just wanna share my results for now:
My config (temporally):
Asrock Z77 extreme 6
8gb ram
I5 3570k
2x Sapphire R9 280x vapor-x oc 3gb ddr5 384bit
1 psu chieftech super 750w
My bat file: clpts_x86-64.exe -u x -p x -t 0,0,1,1 -a 2
Miner version: clpts-v0.2.2_win_x86-64
Undervolted as follow:
Core voltage (mv): 1094 mv
power limit: 0
core clock: 1055 mhz
memory clock: 1500 mhz
fan speed: 56%
Temp: Gpu0 - 66 oC
GPU1 - 55 oC
(http://i58.tinypic.com/309n50z.jpg)
-
how to set the fan speed to 100%? with multiple GPU Fan speed? @ubuntu 12.04
Hint : cgminer..... aticonfig does NOT work under linux with more than one GPU
It works, just use the following.
export DISPLAY=:0
aticonfig --pplib-cmd "set fanspeed 0 100"
export DISPLAY=:0.1
aticonfig --pplib-cmd "set fanspeed 0 100"
"export DISPLAY=:0.X" --> Change X to whatever GPU you want to change the fan speed on.
i just can control 0 GPU ‘s fan speed
but
export DISPLAY=:0.1
aticonfig --pplib-cmd "set fanspeed 0 100"
can not control？
what ’s wrong？
-
use atitweak?
https://github.com/mjmvisser/adl3
-
Hello
Pls Help
-
Hello
Pls Help
according to your latest screenshot, you didn't even do what he suggested
so what more can be said?
well, OK, I'm curious as to why you've increased the voltage and powerlimit in afterburner. with those settings, you should be undervolting
ed: :-\
ok, run at 1100-1250 instead, you shouldnt need to raise voltage for that either, but who knows. depends on the card I guess.
then run
clpts_x86-64 -u xxx -p xxx -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 1
if you still get super slow speeds, fix your drivers
i get 3600 c/m with a 7970 in windows 7
ed2: oh, for starters, both the screenshots in here are using the wrong version of catalyst
ed3: and in screenshot 1, uh, is your PSU good enough to run that? lol.
-
Hello
Pls Help
according to your latest screenshot, you didn't even do what he suggested
so what more can be said?
well, OK, I'm curious as to why you've increased the voltage and powerlimit in afterburner. with those settings, you should be undervolting
ed: :-\
ok, run at 1100-1250 instead, you shouldnt need to raise voltage for that either, but who knows. depends on the card I guess.
then run
clpts_x86-64 -u xxx -p xxx -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 1
if you still get super slow speeds, fix your drivers
i get 3600 c/m with a 7970 in windows 7
ed2: oh, for starters, both the screenshots in here are using the wrong version of catalyst
ed3: and in screenshot 1, uh, is your PSU good enough to run that? lol.
Hello
Thx for reply
Test R9 290 Solo
Windows 8.1 Drivers 13.12
-a 0 -t 0(http://i.imgur.com/llaV1zJ.jpg)
-
I get the following error ...
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.7 RC2 <experimental>
** by NaN - based on ptsminer.
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmai
l.com
** PTS: PtLx9kDLTXtR1ae3u7naXLPeGjjHZ1PGoR
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 2): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 1 (deviceID 0): Tahiti
Vendor of platform #2 / 2: Intel(R) Corporation
error in gpuhash.h, line 131: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)
I'm getting this exact same error in Linux Lite. I assume its the same problem. I'm running Catalyst 13.12 drivers. Can someone help with scrypt to disable the Intel OpenCL in terminal?
-
Hello
Pls Help
according to your latest screenshot, you didn't even do what he suggested
so what more can be said?
well, OK, I'm curious as to why you've increased the voltage and powerlimit in afterburner. with those settings, you should be undervolting
ed: :-\
ok, run at 1100-1250 instead, you shouldnt need to raise voltage for that either, but who knows. depends on the card I guess.
then run
clpts_x86-64 -u xxx -p xxx -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 1
if you still get super slow speeds, fix your drivers
i get 3600 c/m with a 7970 in windows 7
ed2: oh, for starters, both the screenshots in here are using the wrong version of catalyst
ed3: and in screenshot 1, uh, is your PSU good enough to run that? lol.
Hello
Thx for reply
Test R9 290 Solo
Windows 8.1 Drivers 13.12
-a 0 -t 0
first, download catalyst v14.1 and amd app sdk 2.9
second, get driver uninstaller from http://www.wagnardmobile.com/DDU/ boot into safe mode select remove AMD drivers, select install windows default drivers, start process, select "restart computer"
third, install catalyst v14.1
four, install amd app sdk 2.9
five, reboot (might not be necessary)
six, clpts_x86-64 -u xxx -p xxx -t 0,0 -a 1
seven, wait at least two minutes
-
Which drivers are working better on this 13.12 or 14.1 ?
Also how do I disable the Intel OpenCL SDK in linux? Its fighting with the AMD SDK apparently. Can't seem to find much on Google about this (nothing actually).
Edit: I'm going to try to get an answer to the SDK problem on an Ubuntu forum... maybe they will help me.
-
Hello
Pls Help
according to your latest screenshot, you didn't even do what he suggested
so what more can be said?
well, OK, I'm curious as to why you've increased the voltage and powerlimit in afterburner. with those settings, you should be undervolting
ed: :-\
ok, run at 1100-1250 instead, you shouldnt need to raise voltage for that either, but who knows. depends on the card I guess.
then run
clpts_x86-64 -u xxx -p xxx -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 1
if you still get super slow speeds, fix your drivers
i get 3600 c/m with a 7970 in windows 7
ed2: oh, for starters, both the screenshots in here are using the wrong version of catalyst
ed3: and in screenshot 1, uh, is your PSU good enough to run that? lol.
Hello
Thx for reply
Test R9 290 Solo
Windows 8.1 Drivers 13.12
-a 0 -t 0
first, download catalyst v14.1 and amd app sdk 2.9
second, get driver uninstaller from http://www.wagnardmobile.com/DDU/ boot into safe mode select remove AMD drivers, select install windows default drivers, start process, select "restart computer" Ok
third, install catalyst v14.1 ok
four, install amd app sdk 2.9 ok
five, reboot (might not be necessary)
six, clpts_x86-64 -u xxx -p xxx -t 0,0 -a 1
seven, wait at least two minutes
look
(http://i.imgur.com/SYWjozX.jpg?1)
-
Bug reported to developer.
I have 4 r9 290x running on ubuntu 12.10. The driver is 13.12 linux. I tried to run clptes but have an error message.
error in xptMiner/clInit.cpp, line 96: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)
Any idea to fix it?
Were you able to fix this? I have the same error code. My devices are found fine though. Just won't start the miner.
-
That's not a miner bug. Most likely there is no running Xserver or OpenCL is not installed correctly. Do you use the newest version because older versions could have such behaviour if a Intel OpenCL platform was installed?
-
I wasn't implying it was a miner bug. I was able to get the miner to fire up on a 5770, even though it couldn't do anything. But when I put the 290 in the machine, then I get this code. I reinstalled the drivers, but same thing. I get this error. So I've got something wrong with the software installation otherwise. Been Googling for two days now. Nothing seems to work. This is the full error. Running AMD 13.12 drivers. And AMD APP SDK 2.9
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.2.2 (ypool.net only)
** by NaN - based on xptMiner by jh00 (clintar's code v1.1)
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmail.com
** PTS: PajuVUWrcPn5ksCFfrBiWQXvpwtE29dcN2
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
error in xptMiner/clInit.cpp, line 96: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)
-
Rewrite your xorg.conf by running sudo aticonfig --adapter=all --initial -f and reboot.
-
Rewrite your xorg.conf by running sudo aticonfig --adapter=all --initial -f and reboot.
I'm pretty sure I did this several times, but I'll try it again. Thanks NaN
-
2x Sapphire R9 280x vapor-x oc 3gb ddr5 384bit
1 psu chieftech super 750w
My bat file: clpts_x86-64.exe -u x -p x -t 0,0,1,1 -a 2
Miner version: clpts-v0.2.2_win_x86-64
Undervolted as follow:
Core voltage (mv): 1094 mv
power limit: 0
core clock: 1055 mhz
memory clock: 1500 mhz
fan speed: 56%
Temp: Gpu0 - 66 oC
GPU1 - 55 oC
Hi znakistu, I have very similar config just like you. My two 7970 are Sapphire ref. design cards. I flashed them to GHz bios (with default voltage 1.162v), which mean now they both have 1050/6000(effective), and yours are 1055/6000. Just wondering how stable have you run under that voltage, 1094mv? I am thinking to undervolt it but not sure how to test it, because the ref. design, my cards are now 85 oC and 82 oC. Hoping I can under volt it and give me some temp down. Can you share me your experience?
@NaN, our 7970/280X are all at sweet point with your num. 2 algorithm... It is weird. I tested each alg. one by one.
-
four, install amd app sdk 2.9
for what it's worth, it looks like sdk shipped with 13.12 is more recent than 2.9 (see dll versions). does it work better with older dlls?
-
You don't need to install the APP SDK for my miner because the OpenCL drivers for the GPU are integrated in the Catalyst driver.
-
four, install amd app sdk 2.9
for what it's worth, it looks like sdk shipped with 13.12 is more recent than 2.9 (see dll versions). does it work better with older dlls?
There is no reason to install the SDK with 13.12. The OpenCL libraries are included. Only install if you want to compile, and even then
be VERY careful as I did try to install the SDK and compile but the SDK version didn't match well with the 13.12 drivers.
:-)
-
I wasn't implying it was a miner bug. I was able to get the miner to fire up on a 5770, even though it couldn't do anything. But when I put the 290 in the machine, then I get this code. I reinstalled the drivers, but same thing. I get this error. So I've got something wrong with the software installation otherwise. Been Googling for two days now. Nothing seems to work. This is the full error. Running AMD 13.12 drivers. And AMD APP SDK 2.9
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.2.2 (ypool.net only)
** by NaN - based on xptMiner by jh00 (clintar's code v1.1)
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmail.com
** PTS: PajuVUWrcPn5ksCFfrBiWQXvpwtE29dcN2
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
error in xptMiner/clInit.cpp, line 96: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)
Had a few work colleague fix this for me.
I was just told AMD forgot some stuff when they released 13.12 and that was causing the problem.
Instead of patching it, just use the AMD 14.1 beta instead and it should work.
-
I wasn't implying it was a miner bug. I was able to get the miner to fire up on a 5770, even though it couldn't do anything. But when I put the 290 in the machine, then I get this code. I reinstalled the drivers, but same thing. I get this error. So I've got something wrong with the software installation otherwise. Been Googling for two days now. Nothing seems to work. This is the full error. Running AMD 13.12 drivers. And AMD APP SDK 2.9
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.2.2 (ypool.net only)
** by NaN - based on xptMiner by jh00 (clintar's code v1.1)
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmail.com
** PTS: PajuVUWrcPn5ksCFfrBiWQXvpwtE29dcN2
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
error in xptMiner/clInit.cpp, line 96: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)
Had a few work colleague fix this for me.
I was just told AMD forgot some stuff when they released 13.12 and that was causing the problem.
Instead of patching it, just use the AMD 14.1 beta instead and it should work.
ouch...
-
I'm running debian7 with amd 13.12 but only getting 7700c/m from my 3 280x, using multiple threads doesn't seem to improve rate, I'm using -a 1
Also CPU usage is very high
Seems people are getting better results on windows ...
-
I wasn't implying it was a miner bug. I was able to get the miner to fire up on a 5770, even though it couldn't do anything. But when I put the 290 in the machine, then I get this code. I reinstalled the drivers, but same thing. I get this error. So I've got something wrong with the software installation otherwise. Been Googling for two days now. Nothing seems to work. This is the full error. Running AMD 13.12 drivers. And AMD APP SDK 2.9
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.2.2 (ypool.net only)
** by NaN - based on xptMiner by jh00 (clintar's code v1.1)
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmail.com
** PTS: PajuVUWrcPn5ksCFfrBiWQXvpwtE29dcN2
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
error in xptMiner/clInit.cpp, line 96: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)
Had a few work colleague fix this for me.
I was just told AMD forgot some stuff when they released 13.12 and that was causing the problem.
Instead of patching it, just use the AMD 14.1 beta instead and it should work.
ouch...
Ouch meaning what? Sucked he had to have someone else fix it? Or that 14.1 drivers suck?
-
@lir111: What are your command line options?
Ouch meaning what? Sucked he had to have someone else fix it? Or that 14.1 drivers suck?
No, "ouch" because AMD f***ed it up. I hoped that those times were over... That is not the only problem with the Catalyst drivers (e.g. the 290(X) performance inconsistency in Windows and Linux)
-
Rewrite your xorg.conf by running sudo aticonfig --adapter=all --initial -f and reboot.
I did this. No dice. Then I uninstalled and re-installed the 14.1 Catalyst drivers 3 times tonight hoping it would work. Still getting the same message. Error -1 on line 96 whatever that means. My 290 is fine, I can mine in windows, but I want to get this working in Linux. I'm really liking Linux other than this issue.
Well, crud. Seems my miner will not start in Linux. Stupid error code. There's nothing on the web about this either. The card shows up fine when running aticonfig --list-adapters. Everything else works as well it seems. I need some ideas if anyone has something for me to try?
-
Here are the code lines I'm trying to start in the Terminal. Maybe there's something wrong here. I am on water. Could the absence of a fan be the culprit? I know on Windows I had to add a line to get it to work. Sure its different in Linux if this is the issue. Anyway, here's the code:
#!/bin/bash
./clpts -u username.minername -p password -t 0 -a 1
-
The error indicates that something is wrong with OpenCL. I would check whether the AMD APP SDK is correctly uninstalled and I would try another driver installed via apt-get.
-
@lir111: What are your command line options?
Ouch meaning what? Sucked he had to have someone else fix it? Or that 14.1 drivers suck?
No, "ouch" because AMD f***ed it up. I hoped that those times were over... That is not the only problem with the Catalyst drivers (e.g. the 290(X) performance inconsistency in Windows and Linux)
I so hope the Windows issue is resolved for the 290x's. Not sure how long I can stomach Linux's lack of undervolting/clocking tools for these cards. I can't even see what voltage my cards are running at... :(
Has anyone tried mining with the 14.1 drivers on windows with the 290x's?
-
@lir111: What are your command line options?
Ouch meaning what? Sucked he had to have someone else fix it? Or that 14.1 drivers suck?
No, "ouch" because AMD f***ed it up. I hoped that those times were over... That is not the only problem with the Catalyst drivers (e.g. the 290(X) performance inconsistency in Windows and Linux)
I so hope the Windows issue is resolved for the 290x's. Not sure how long I can stomach Linux's lack of undervolting/clocking tools for these cards. I can't even see what voltage my cards are running at... :(
Has anyone tried mining with the 14.1 drivers on windows with the 290x's?
I've been reluctant to try the 14.1 drivers because of the significant performance impacts seen with scrypt miners. I know my performance on the ASUS R9-290XOC is crap (550KH/s) compared to where it should be.
In clpts I'm getting around 3250c/m with the R9-290X under Windows 8.1 and the 13.x AMD drivers.
How much better is it under Linux?
-
@lir111: What are your command line options?
Ouch meaning what? Sucked he had to have someone else fix it? Or that 14.1 drivers suck?
No, "ouch" because AMD f***ed it up. I hoped that those times were over... That is not the only problem with the Catalyst drivers (e.g. the 290(X) performance inconsistency in Windows and Linux)
I so hope the Windows issue is resolved for the 290x's. Not sure how long I can stomach Linux's lack of undervolting/clocking tools for these cards. I can't even see what voltage my cards are running at... :(
Has anyone tried mining with the 14.1 drivers on windows with the 290x's?
I've been reluctant to try the 14.1 drivers because of the significant performance impacts seen with scrypt miners. I know my performance on the ASUS R9-290XOC is crap (550KH/s) compared to where it should be.
In clpts I'm getting around 3250c/m with the R9-290X under Windows 8.1 and the 13.x AMD drivers.
How much better is it under Linux?
Overclocked 7970's / 280X's are getting 3500CPM on Windows so needless to say there's an issue with the Hawaii cards. My 290X's on Linux net me 4500 CPM each @ 1125/1400.
-
I've been reluctant to try the 14.1 drivers because of the significant performance impacts seen with scrypt miners. I know my performance on the ASUS R9-290XOC is crap (550KH/s) compared to where it should be.
In clpts I'm getting around 3250c/m with the R9-290X under Windows 8.1 and the 13.x AMD drivers.
How much better is it under Linux?
I've seen people post 4100-4500 cpm under ubuntu for the R9 290X... they all noticed a huge gain when they switched from windows... I think folks have made the same comment on other cards, but its been less noticeable for most cards, but the 290 series sure does not like windows for some reason...
little off topic... anyone looking to get some smaller cards, I am selling cards to upgrade to other cards... so if you're looking for some smaller R9 270 2GB series cards check out my posting in the other forum here, powered risers can also be included... :)
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=3069.0
-
I've been reluctant to try the 14.1 drivers because of the significant performance impacts seen with scrypt miners. I know my performance on the ASUS R9-290XOC is crap (550KH/s) compared to where it should be.
In clpts I'm getting around 3250c/m with the R9-290X under Windows 8.1 and the 13.x AMD drivers.
How much better is it under Linux?
I've seen people post 4100-4500 cpm under ubuntu for the R9 290X... they all noticed a huge gain when they switched from windows... I think folks have made the same comment on other cards, but its been less noticeable for most cards, but the 290 series sure does not like windows for some reason...
little off topic... anyone looking to get some smaller cards, I am selling cards to upgrade to other cards... so if you're looking for some smaller R9 270 2GB series cards check out my posting in the other forum here, powered risers can also be included... :)
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=3069.0
That's a huge performance difference, especially with the hit PTS earnings have taken with all the new miners jumping in ypool. I need the machine running windows (Server 2012r2 actually) during the day. I'll have to experiment with SMOS tomorrow and see if it supports the MB and NIC.
-
@lir111: What are your command line options?
Ouch meaning what? Sucked he had to have someone else fix it? Or that 14.1 drivers suck?
No, "ouch" because AMD f***ed it up. I hoped that those times were over... That is not the only problem with the Catalyst drivers (e.g. the 290(X) performance inconsistency in Windows and Linux)
-t 0,1,2 -a 1
-
Hello I have a Saphire R9 270X with 4GB on W7 x64 and AMD 14.1 Drivers.
I have -t 0,0 -a 2
and it runs with 1900-2000 CPM. Is one 0 for one Thread on the Card which takes 1,25 GB? It was talking about to run 3 Threads which one BAT file?
-
Hello
Sick
3 R9 290 Sapphire
2800cpm
Test Windows 8.1 64bits Drivers 14.1 SDK 2.9
Help help
-
I've read all the pages in one night and summarized some performance results (which card gets how many CPMs) from the discussion. And wanted to share it. I wish I could upload it in more elegant way (web friendly), but unfortunately I couldn't manage it. If someone can transform it in a web form it'd be great.
You can checkout from https://www.dropbox.com/s/yl5abbfv6k5oehc/clpts-results.xlsx (https://www.dropbox.com/s/yl5abbfv6k5oehc/clpts-results.xlsx)
BTW: Great job NaN, thanks.
-
Hello
Sick
3 R9 290 Sapphire
2800cpm
Test Windows 8.1 64bits Drivers 14.1 SDK 2.9
Help help
1. please post your .bat-commands for the miner (-t + -a)
2. go back to catalyst 13.12 - 14.1 (beta!) doesn't work properly for my w7-64-rig
-
hello please help me
i use 3x 280x r9
my bat file config is
clpts_x86.exe -o ypool.net:10034:8080:8081:8082:8083:8084:8085:8086:8087 -u try.a -p 1 -a 1 -t 0,1,2
but the miner always crash.. please help me..
-
Hello
Sick
3 R9 290 Sapphire
2800cpm
Test Windows 8.1 64bits Drivers 14.1 SDK 2.9
Help help
Most likely you are using only one card. Please use -t 0,1,2 or -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 in your command line parameters. also you can add -a 1 or -a 2.
-
hello please help me
i use 3x 280x r9
my bat file config is
clpts_x86.exe -o ypool.net:10034:8080:8081:8082:8083:8084:8085:8086:8087 -u try.a -p 1 -a 1 -t 0,1,2
but the miner always crash.. please help me..
try clpts_x86.exe -u <your-username>.<worker-name> -p <your-password> -t 0,1,2 -a 1
or substitute -t 0,1,2 with -t 0,0,1,1,2,2. furthermore -a 2 instead of -a 1 is worth trying out. Otherwise I need the output of the miner before it crashes.
-
possibl help via TeamViewer ?
-
clpts_x86.exe -o ypool.net:10034:8080:8081:8082:8083:8084:8085:8086:8087 -u try.a -p 1 -a 2 -t 0,1,2
this is worked to me... thank you..
another question please. how about another settings like tc ? i? is this possible here? and also how much your profit using 1 280x?
-
I tried to run 0.2 on my 290x but i get only 200-300cpm... any ideas why?
C:\Temp>clpts_x86-64.exe -u JonDja.gpu -p 1 -t 0 -a 0
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.2.2 (ypool.net only)
** by NaN - based on xptMiner by jh00 (clintar's code v1.1)
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gm
l.com
** PTS: PajuVUWrcPn5ksCFfrBiWQXvpwtE29dcN2
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#2 / 2): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 1 (deviceID 0): Hawaii
Fee Percentage: 2.50%. To set, use "-d" flag e.g. "-d 3.5" is 3.5% donation
Connected to server usinWARNING: Linking two modules of different target tripl
: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
g x.pushWARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-un
own-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
through(xpt) protocol
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-am
pencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-am
pencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
xpt: Logged in with JonDja.gpu
New block data - height: 54499 tx count: 0
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Hawaii':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 162)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 179)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 169)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 222)
Unrolled as requested!
collisions/min: 255.0000 Shares total: 0
collisions/min: 247.5000 Shares total: 0
-
I guess that catalyst 13.12 is faster than 14.1... but that's only a guess. in a few minutes I will know more. you have no other cpu load, or?
EDIT Catalyst 13.12 is indeed faster than 14.1 on Windows with R9 290(X).
-
i used 3x r9 280x dual x oc
is this good with collisions/min: 4950.?
-
Ok i fixed my 300 cpm issue... wrong cartalyst.
I get ~2900 cpm on a Powercolor 290x now. I thought it should be around 4000... whats wrong?
-
@JohnD: You have to use Linux. It is some driver related problem... I still have no answer from AMD engineers.
i used 3x r9 280x dual x oc
is this good with collisions/min: 4950.?
no. it is bad. you should get about 10k cpm. Do you use Catalyst 13.12?
-
@lir111: What are your command line options?
Ouch meaning what? Sucked he had to have someone else fix it? Or that 14.1 drivers suck?
No, "ouch" because AMD f***ed it up. I hoped that those times were over... That is not the only problem with the Catalyst drivers (e.g. the 290(X) performance inconsistency in Windows and Linux)
I so hope the Windows issue is resolved for the 290x's. Not sure how long I can stomach Linux's lack of undervolting/clocking tools for these cards. I can't even see what voltage my cards are running at... :(
Has anyone tried mining with the 14.1 drivers on windows with the 290x's?
I've been reluctant to try the 14.1 drivers because of the significant performance impacts seen with scrypt miners. I know my performance on the ASUS R9-290XOC is crap (550KH/s) compared to where it should be.
In clpts I'm getting around 3250c/m with the R9-290X under Windows 8.1 and the 13.x AMD drivers.
How much better is it under Linux?
~4000cpm stock and ~4500 cpm with OC.
-
Ok I switch from debian to w7-64 bits and now I'm getting 3400cpm per card :)
I think It may be linked to chipset drivers not being good on linux.
-
@JohnD: You have to use Linux. It is some driver related problem... I still have no answer from AMD engineers.
i used 3x r9 280x dual x oc
is this good with collisions/min: 4950.?
no. it is bad. you should get about 10k cpm. Do you use Catalyst 13.12?
yes i used 13.12 now and its still 4500 collision..
here is my config
clpts_x86.exe -o ypool.net:10034:8080:8081:8082:8083:8084:8085:8086:8087 -u user.a -p 1 -a 2 -t 0,1,2
do i need to run multiple bat file? or its enough with 1 running bat file?
UPDATE:
now i use this -t 0,0,1,2
.. and i got 8100 collision ..... what now? do i need to overlocked? how?
-
my 7970 can get 3700 cpm in windows 7, r7-260 (2gb) around 1300, and r9 270 (2gb) around 1700
too bad clpts doesn't have a backup pool, it's probably worse than most of the other gpu miners if you tested efficiency over a 24hr period
ed: this is with catalyst 14.1
btw, i also found it much faster to run 3 separate instances of clpts in my machine with the r7-260, r9 270, r9 270.... it went from about 4500 cpm to *4700 or so (ok, I guess that's not "much" faster, but faster anyway)
-
@JohnD: You have to use Linux. It is some driver related problem... I still have no answer from AMD engineers.
i used 3x r9 280x dual x oc
is this good with collisions/min: 4950.?
no. it is bad. you should get about 10k cpm. Do you use Catalyst 13.12?
yes i used 13.12 now and its still 4500 collision..
here is my config
clpts_x86.exe -o ypool.net:10034:8080:8081:8082:8083:8084:8085:8086:8087 -u user.a -p 1 -a 2 -t 0,1,2
do i need to run multiple bat file? or its enough with 1 running bat file?
UPDATE:
now i use this -t 0,0,1,2
.. and i got 8100 collision ..... what now? do i need to overlocked? how?
-t is for threads
you should be using 0,0,1,1,2,2 on three 280X cards...
this runs two threads per GPU... any card with 3GB or 4GB can run two threads...
0 = GPU 1
1 = GPU 2
2 = GPU 3
3 = GPU 4
4 = GPU 5
if you have ONE video card with 2GB of memory it would be -t 0
if you have ONE video card with 3GB of memory it would be -t 0,0
if you have ONE video card with 4GB of memory it would be -t 0,0
if you have TWO video card with 2GB of memory it would be -t 0,1
if you have TWO video card with 3GB of memory it would be -t 0,0,1,1
if you have TWO video card with 4GB of memory it would be -t 0,0,1,1
if you have THREE video card with 2GB of memory it would be -t 0,1,2
if you have THREE video card with 3GB of memory it would be -t 0,0,1,1,2,2
if you have THREE video card with 4GB of memory it would be -t 0,0,1,1,2,2
if you have FOUR video card with 2GB of memory it would be -t 0,1,2,3
if you have FOUR video card with 3GB of memory it would be -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3
if you have FOUR video card with 4GB of memory it would be -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3
if you have FIVE video card with 2GB of memory it would be -t 0,1,2,3,4
if you have FIVE video card with 3GB of memory it would be -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4
if you have FIVE video card with 4GB of memory it would be -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4
R9 270 2GB = 1 THREAD PER GPU
R9 270X 2GB = 1 THREAD PER GPU
R9 270X 4GB = 2 THREAD PER GPU
R9 280X 3GB = 2 THREAD PER GPU
R9 290 4GB = 2 THREAD PER GPU (currently performs best under linux)
R9 290X 4GB = 2 THREAD PER GPU (currently performs best under linux)
AMD Catalyst software 13.12 is actually DRIVER VERSION 13.251.0.0
AMD Catalyst software 14.10 is actually DRIVER VERSION 13.350.1005.0 (BETA, NOT RECOMMENDED)
-
@JohnD: You have to use Linux. It is some driver related problem... I still have no answer from AMD engineers.
i used 3x r9 280x dual x oc
is this good with collisions/min: 4950.?
no. it is bad. you should get about 10k cpm. Do you use Catalyst 13.12?
yes i used 13.12 now and its still 4500 collision..
here is my config
clpts_x86.exe -o ypool.net:10034:8080:8081:8082:8083:8084:8085:8086:8087 -u user.a -p 1 -a 2 -t 0,1,2
do i need to run multiple bat file? or its enough with 1 running bat file?
UPDATE:
now i use this -t 0,0,1,2
.. and i got 8100 collision ..... what now? do i need to overlocked? how?
-t is for threads
you should be using 0,0,1,1,2,2 on three 280X cards...
this runs two threads per GPU... any card with 3GB or 4GB can run two threads...
0 = GPU 1
1 = GPU 2
2 = GPU 3
3 = GPU 4
4 = GPU 5
if you have ONE video card with 2GB of memory it would be -t 0
if you have ONE video card with 3GB of memory it would be -t 0,0
if you have ONE video card with 4GB of memory it would be -t 0,0
if you have TWO video card with 2GB of memory it would be -t 0,1
if you have TWO video card with 3GB of memory it would be -t 0,0,1,1
if you have TWO video card with 4GB of memory it would be -t 0,0,1,1
if you have THREE video card with 2GB of memory it would be -t 0,1,2
if you have THREE video card with 3GB of memory it would be -t 0,0,1,1,2,2
if you have THREE video card with 4GB of memory it would be -t 0,0,1,1,2,2
if you have FOUR video card with 2GB of memory it would be -t 0,1,2,3
if you have FOUR video card with 3GB of memory it would be -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3
if you have FOUR video card with 4GB of memory it would be -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3
if you have FIVE video card with 2GB of memory it would be -t 0,1,2,3,4
if you have FIVE video card with 3GB of memory it would be -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4
if you have FIVE video card with 4GB of memory it would be -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3,4,4
when i put -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 .. the miner always crash
-
I wasn't implying it was a miner bug. I was able to get the miner to fire up on a 5770, even though it couldn't do anything. But when I put the 290 in the machine, then I get this code. I reinstalled the drivers, but same thing. I get this error. So I've got something wrong with the software installation otherwise. Been Googling for two days now. Nothing seems to work. This is the full error. Running AMD 13.12 drivers. And AMD APP SDK 2.9
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.2.2 (ypool.net only)
** by NaN - based on xptMiner by jh00 (clintar's code v1.1)
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmail.com
** PTS: PajuVUWrcPn5ksCFfrBiWQXvpwtE29dcN2
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
error in xptMiner/clInit.cpp, line 96: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)
Had a few work colleague fix this for me.
I was just told AMD forgot some stuff when they released 13.12 and that was causing the problem.
Instead of patching it, just use the AMD 14.1 beta instead and it should work.
Seems they didn't fix it in 14.1 either. I'm getting the exact same error in 14.1.
-
when i put -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 .. the miner always crash
what GPU is your monitor plugged into... try running only one thread on that GPU... have you undervolted the cards? have you overclocked the cards?
-
@battleaxe: Your GPU is not recognized by the OpenCL implementation. I guess that the easiest way to fix the driver is to do a clean install of Ubuntu and after that only install the Catalyst driver 13.12 WITHOUT the APP SDK. To install the driver you have to download the driver from the AMD website and create a package for your Ubuntu version. After that install the packet using apt-get.
-
when i put -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 .. the miner always crash
what GPU is your monitor plugged into... try running only one thread on that GPU... have you undervolted the cards? have you overclocked the cards?
i think its on my first gpu? how can i know that where did i plugged it????
yes my cards is undervolted
overlocked? no its not bcoz i didnt know how
-
@lir111: What are your command line options?
Ouch meaning what? Sucked he had to have someone else fix it? Or that 14.1 drivers suck?
No, "ouch" because AMD f***ed it up. I hoped that those times were over... That is not the only problem with the Catalyst drivers (e.g. the 290(X) performance inconsistency in Windows and Linux)
I so hope the Windows issue is resolved for the 290x's. Not sure how long I can stomach Linux's lack of undervolting/clocking tools for these cards. I can't even see what voltage my cards are running at... :(
Has anyone tried mining with the 14.1 drivers on windows with the 290x's?
I've been reluctant to try the 14.1 drivers because of the significant performance impacts seen with scrypt miners. I know my performance on the ASUS R9-290XOC is crap (550KH/s) compared to where it should be.
In clpts I'm getting around 3250c/m with the R9-290X under Windows 8.1 and the 13.x AMD drivers.
How much better is it under Linux?
Im getting 4133 cpm per card with my powercolor 290x's
-
Id does not work on 32bit linux bamt, right?
-
here's example of why other miner that allows more pool options is better:
collisions/min: 3710.0000 Shares total: 18
collisions/min: 3705.9091 Shares total: 18
Share found! (Blockheight: 54606)
collisions/min: 3698.2609 Shares total: 19
Share found! (Blockheight: 54606)
collisions/min: 3700.6250 Shares total: 20
collisions/min: 3701.6000 Shares total: 20
collisions/min: 3699.0385 Shares total: 20
New block data - height: 54607 tx count: 8
collisions/min: 3691.1111 Shares total: 20
Share found! (Blockheight: 54607)
collisions/min: 3690.7143 Shares total: 21
collisions/min: 3696.5517 Shares total: 21
collisions/min: 3699.5000 Shares total: 21
collisions/min: 3693.5484 Shares total: 21
Share found! (Blockheight: 54607)
collisions/min: 3692.6562 Shares total: 22
Share found! (Blockheight: 54607)
collisions/min: 3689.5455 Shares total: 23
collisions/min: 3691.0294 Shares total: 23
Share found! (Blockheight: 54607)
collisions/min: 3695.4286 Shares total: 24
Share found! (Blockheight: 54607)
Share found! (Blockheight: 54607)
collisions/min: 3697.5000 Shares total: 26
New block data - height: 54608 tx count: 8
collisions/min: 3703.9189 Shares total: 26
Share found! (Blockheight: 54608)
Share found! (Blockheight: 54608)
Share found! (Blockheight: 54608)
collisions/min: 3711.1842 Shares total: 29
Share found! (Blockheight: 54608)
Share found! (Blockheight: 54608)
collisions/min: 3705.3846 Shares total: 31
Share found! (Blockheight: 54608)
New block data - height: 54609 tx count: 1
collisions/min: 3713.7500 Shares total: 32
Share found! (Blockheight: 54609)
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Ping 27982.1ms (Average 14096.0)
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
collisions/min: 3714.3902 Shares total: 33
Share found! (Blockheight: 54609)
Share found! (Blockheight: 54609)
collisions/min: 3711.0714 Shares total: 35
i have constant ping to my server in germany @ 167ms at same time
-
YES
Please add the URL command software supports any mineral pool bar I used http://ptspool.com/ better in China, YPOOL too many people often go wrong, BEEEER people too little too out of the blocks, it is like this software is currently the fastest Please join command the support of other mineral pool bar
-
I've ran into an issue with 0.2.2 (Didn't test with previous versions) : I can't launch more than 8 threads inside one clpts, have to launch 2 times. Seems related to the lenght of the command line, when I put more than 8 threads, clpts can't authenticate (showing me a weird one char login).
My login is 8 chars, my password 1 char.
Probably a minor issue but if you can have a look, it's probably a 30s fix ;)
Thank you
NaN, did you see this message ?
-
Yeah, it's definitely not a restriction of the miner. The next version will introduce multi-pool support and pool fall-back together with a config file so those issues should vanish
-
Re
Very Good NaN Configure Rig
3 R9 290= 9700 cpm
possible Overclok via ubuntu ?
-
when i put -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 .. the miner always crash
what GPU is your monitor plugged into... try running only one thread on that GPU... have you undervolted the cards? have you overclocked the cards?
i think its on my first gpu? how can i know that where did i plugged it????
yes my cards is undervolted
overlocked? no its not bcoz i didnt know how
If you have undervolted your video card, that is the MOST likely reason why the miner keeps crashing when trying to run multiple threads as it requires more power, but you can't provide it since you've lowered the voltage, the display drivers stop working and the miner does as a result... or one card will stop working while the others continue to run... I went through that exact experience when I was trying to find the best voltage to use... you simply need to increase the voltage on each card until you no longer have this problem.... each card may be slightly different with voltage requirements, but I would recommend raising all of them to an equal amount...
-
Yeah, it's definitely not a restriction of the miner. The next version will introduce multi-pool support and pool fall-back together with a config file so those issues should vanish
I can't wait NaN, that is great news. yPool has been getting killed. I don't know if they are getting attacked or it's just the load. Things have been really unstable since they pushed past 20Mc/m.
-
@battleaxe: Your GPU is not recognized by the OpenCL implementation. I guess that the easiest way to fix the driver is to do a clean install of Ubuntu and after that only install the Catalyst driver 13.12 WITHOUT the APP SDK. To install the driver you have to download the driver from the AMD website and create a package for your Ubuntu version. After that install the packet using apt-get.
Your fix not work. Same truble with no connected display to videocard (likely X-Server not start). Rig controled via RDP. If connect display on start-> no this errors. Without display ati --odg not work, but cgminer work (with ADL and temp control).
-
@battleaxe: Your GPU is not recognized by the OpenCL implementation. I guess that the easiest way to fix the driver is to do a clean install of Ubuntu and after that only install the Catalyst driver 13.12 WITHOUT the APP SDK. To install the driver you have to download the driver from the AMD website and create a package for your Ubuntu version. After that install the packet using apt-get.
Your fix not work. Same truble with no connected display to videocard (likely X-Server not start). Rig controled via RDP. If connect display on start-> no this errors. Without display ati --odg not work, but cgminer work (with ADL and temp control).
Having trouble understanding this. Can someone help understand his English? Right now I'm reinstalling Ubuntu fresh. Gonna try that.
-
If you wanna install the Catalyst driver on Ubuntu, then please use the following guide: http://wiki.cchtml.com/index.php/Ubuntu_Saucy_Installation_Guide
Make sure that you run sudo aticonfig --adapter=all --initial after the installation and reboot after that. --buildpkg Ubuntu/saucy has to be replaced by the name of your Ubuntu distro e.g. --buildpkg Ubuntu/raring.
-
Hi guys,
I'd like to ask a question about the r9 290x video cards.
1. What is the difference in c/m between 290x and 290
2. Why some 290x cost 800 USD but others just 440 - 600 USD. Is there a difference in c/m between ASUS that cost 800 USD and SAPHIRE that cost 500 USD????
10x in advance
-
If you wanna install the Catalyst driver on Ubuntu, then please use the following guide: http://wiki.cchtml.com/index.php/Ubuntu_Saucy_Installation_Guide
Make sure that you run sudo aticonfig --adapter=all --initial after the installation and reboot after that. --buildpkg Ubuntu/saucy has to be replaced by the name of your Ubuntu distro e.g. --buildpkg Ubuntu/raring.
I find installing 13.12 from the repos to be a much simpler task.
sudo apt-get install fglrx-updates fglrx-amdcccle-updates fglrx-updates-dev
aticonfig --lsa
sudo aticonfig --adapter=all --initial
sudo reboot
-
Will it work on 32bit llinux? I can not launch it on my bamt. Please, do not ignore me.
-
Will it work on 32bit llinux? I can not launch it on my bamt. Please, do not ignore me.
In the readme under todo he has listed 32bit version so most likely no.
-
hey, having a bit of an issue with the miner.
currently have two 280x cards in my system.
both have exactly the same clocks, and get virtually the same hash on every miner i have used sofar.
however, using the beer miner from here, one of my cards gets 3400c/m, while the other only gets 800c/m
any ideas why this might be happening?
tried using one instance, two seperate instances, doesnt make any difference...
the following is what i have in my bat file.
clpts_x86-64 PYXryJqS1vvzwutrdr7msEcBvt3tnH3ZQQ -t 0,0,1,1 -a 1
-
try -t 0,1 first. after that -t 0,0,1 and -t 0,1,1. My guess is that one of the threads creates high cpu load.
-
running -t 0,1,1 does bump me up to 5900c/m on one instance, or if i go with two instances, 3400c/m and 2500c/m
however, cpu load never went up above 15% on the other one, running on a qx9650 @ 4.0ghz
why such high variance on two cards running exactly the same clocks?
even if just running cards by themself, one at a time, -t 0,0 gets 800c/m, -t 1,1 gets 3400c/m
-
Ubuntu 13.04 + drivers 13.12 rig crash drivers :-\
-
Hi guys,
I'd like to ask a question about the r9 290x video cards.
1. What is the difference in c/m between 290x and 290
2. Why some 290x cost 800 USD but others just 440 - 600 USD. Is there a difference in c/m between ASUS that cost 800 USD and SAPHIRE that cost 500 USD????
10x in advance
-
Ubuntu 13.04 + drivers 13.12 rig crash drivers :-\
reinstall ubuntu and follow the instruction I gave:
If you wanna install the Catalyst driver on Ubuntu, then please use the following guide: http://wiki.cchtml.com/index.php/Ubuntu_Saucy_Installation_Guide
Make sure that you run sudo aticonfig --adapter=all --initial after the installation and reboot after that. --buildpkg Ubuntu/saucy has to be replaced by the name of your Ubuntu distro e.g. --buildpkg Ubuntu/raring.
-
Any problem ypool? balance is not increasing properly per hour 0.02 PTS... same CPM before in one hour 0.04 to 0.05 PTS im getting now its very slow?
-
when i put -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 .. the miner always crash
what GPU is your monitor plugged into... try running only one thread on that GPU... have you undervolted the cards? have you overclocked the cards?
i think its on my first gpu? how can i know that where did i plugged it????
yes my cards is undervolted
overlocked? no its not bcoz i didnt know how
If you have undervolted your video card, that is the MOST likely reason why the miner keeps crashing when trying to run multiple threads as it requires more power, but you can't provide it since you've lowered the voltage, the display drivers stop working and the miner does as a result... or one card will stop working while the others continue to run... I went through that exact experience when I was trying to find the best voltage to use... you simply need to increase the voltage on each card until you no longer have this problem.... each card may be slightly different with voltage requirements, but I would recommend raising all of them to an equal amount...
i raise the voltage into 1225 but still crashing.. i am worried, is there any related issues to OS? coz i used windows 7 32 bit
-
@lir111: What are your command line options?
Ouch meaning what? Sucked he had to have someone else fix it? Or that 14.1 drivers suck?
No, "ouch" because AMD f***ed it up. I hoped that those times were over... That is not the only problem with the Catalyst drivers (e.g. the 290(X) performance inconsistency in Windows and Linux)
I so hope the Windows issue is resolved for the 290x's. Not sure how long I can stomach Linux's lack of undervolting/clocking tools for these cards. I can't even see what voltage my cards are running at... :(
Has anyone tried mining with the 14.1 drivers on windows with the 290x's?
I've been reluctant to try the 14.1 drivers because of the significant performance impacts seen with scrypt miners. I know my performance on the ASUS R9-290XOC is crap (550KH/s) compared to where it should be.
In clpts I'm getting around 3250c/m with the R9-290X under Windows 8.1 and the 13.x AMD drivers.
How much better is it under Linux?
~4000cpm stock and ~4500 cpm with OC.
Wow! R9-290x 4500cpm...I'm Jealous.
Can you share your OC settings?
-
If you wanna install the Catalyst driver on Ubuntu, then please use the following guide: http://wiki.cchtml.com/index.php/Ubuntu_Saucy_Installation_Guide
Make sure that you run sudo aticonfig --adapter=all --initial after the installation and reboot after that. --buildpkg Ubuntu/saucy has to be replaced by the name of your Ubuntu distro e.g. --buildpkg Ubuntu/raring.
This is the version of Ubuntu I just installed. http://www.ubuntu.com/download/desktop How do I confirm which distro it is? I looked on the page but didn't find anything to lead me which distro....
-
Reason: Share is outdated
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Invalid share
Reason: Share is outdated
Ping 34246.4ms (Average 20360.0)
What happened to ypool?
-
@lir111: What are your command line options?
Ouch meaning what? Sucked he had to have someone else fix it? Or that 14.1 drivers suck?
No, "ouch" because AMD f***ed it up. I hoped that those times were over... That is not the only problem with the Catalyst drivers (e.g. the 290(X) performance inconsistency in Windows and Linux)
I so hope the Windows issue is resolved for the 290x's. Not sure how long I can stomach Linux's lack of undervolting/clocking tools for these cards. I can't even see what voltage my cards are running at... :(
Has anyone tried mining with the 14.1 drivers on windows with the 290x's?
I've been reluctant to try the 14.1 drivers because of the significant performance impacts seen with scrypt miners. I know my performance on the ASUS R9-290XOC is crap (550KH/s) compared to where it should be.
In clpts I'm getting around 3250c/m with the R9-290X under Windows 8.1 and the 13.x AMD drivers.
How much better is it under Linux?
~4000cpm stock and ~4500 cpm with OC.
Wow! R9-290x 4500cpm...I'm Jealous.
Can you share your OC settings?
1150 core and 1250 memory are my latest clock. No volt changes.
-
Yeah, it's definitely not a restriction of the miner. The next version will introduce multi-pool support and pool fall-back together with a config file so those issues should vanish
looks like we really will need multi-pool and fall-back, I'm reading ypool is having extreme issues from what others are posting, and beeeeer has rejections rising up into the double digits suddenly... any chance the fall-back can be set to try another pool if a certain level of rejection rate is reached... I'm used to 1.5% give or take, but I'm up to 10% today and others are stuck well into the 20% or more range... not that I really see many PTS pools out there...
are you having any issues on ypool?
-
@lir111: What are your command line options?
Ouch meaning what? Sucked he had to have someone else fix it? Or that 14.1 drivers suck?
No, "ouch" because AMD f***ed it up. I hoped that those times were over... That is not the only problem with the Catalyst drivers (e.g. the 290(X) performance inconsistency in Windows and Linux)
I so hope the Windows issue is resolved for the 290x's. Not sure how long I can stomach Linux's lack of undervolting/clocking tools for these cards. I can't even see what voltage my cards are running at... :(
Has anyone tried mining with the 14.1 drivers on windows with the 290x's?
I've been reluctant to try the 14.1 drivers because of the significant performance impacts seen with scrypt miners. I know my performance on the ASUS R9-290XOC is crap (550KH/s) compared to where it should be.
In clpts I'm getting around 3250c/m with the R9-290X under Windows 8.1 and the 13.x AMD drivers.
How much better is it under Linux?
~4000cpm stock and ~4500 cpm with OC.
Wow! R9-290x 4500cpm...I'm Jealous.
Can you share your OC settings?
1150 core and 1250 memory are my latest clock. No volt changes.
I try it but still 2800 CPM. :-\ what did I missing? windows 7 64 bit? or be better on ubuntu?
-
If you wanna install the Catalyst driver on Ubuntu, then please use the following guide: http://wiki.cchtml.com/index.php/Ubuntu_Saucy_Installation_Guide
Make sure that you run sudo aticonfig --adapter=all --initial after the installation and reboot after that. --buildpkg Ubuntu/saucy has to be replaced by the name of your Ubuntu distro e.g. --buildpkg Ubuntu/raring.
Given the better speeds in Linux, I fought for many hours and finally got up and running thanks to that guide.
I had to use the 14.x Beta drivers because there is no Ubuntu/saucy target in 13.12.
My R9-290X-OC (Asus) is now running 4200c/m consistently under Linux Mint 16. Very happy.
Please enjoy your 2.5% NaN! great work.
-
NaN. I just wanted to let you know that I got it working using your last advice. Sending some PTS your way soon as I make something on this thing. :) Thank you!
Okay. Now can someone tell me how to overclock this thing in Linux? I'm fine with using the Terminal to set the OC so I just need your commands if someone wouldn't mind helping me.
-
NaN. I just wanted to let you know that I got it working using your last advice. Sending some PTS your way soon as I make something on this thing. :) Thank you!
Okay. Now can someone tell me how to overclock this thing in Linux? I'm fine with using the Terminal to set the OC so I just need your commands if someone wouldn't mind helping me.
Use the CGminer Command ,google how use it.
-
NaN. I just wanted to let you know that I got it working using your last advice. Sending some PTS your way soon as I make something on this thing. :) Thank you!
Okay. Now can someone tell me how to overclock this thing in Linux? I'm fine with using the Terminal to set the OC so I just need your commands if someone wouldn't mind helping me.
Use the CGminer Command ,google how use it.
I did. It didn't work for some reason. Man this thing has been so much trouble. At least its working now. But I know my GPU can clock way higher than 945/1250, so I know I could do much better.
-
Hi, tnx for the best gpu miner ;)
can u make version for http://ptspool.com/ (http://ptspool.com/)?
I want to mine in http://ptspool.com/ but can not use the miner.
I'm trying with "-o 112.124.13.238:28988" but can not connect.
ptspool.com also support xpt so you just need to give the option "-o" to select the pool.
-
Hey,
thanks for your great miner.
What exactly do i need to mine on Linux?
I am using mainly linux (servers and notebook) so i have no issues with configuring linux but the 290x machine is my gaming pc and runs with windows 8.1 . I want a simple linux installation that runs on a USB device so i can mine at night with the 290x.
-
@NaN - This is the first time I've ran into this, any idea what it is?
[WORKER5] share found: 6494643 <-> 5314636 #12 (2880) @ 1393099429
watchdog timer triggered
-
That means that the server did not respond within 10s and the miner will try a reconnect.
-
Things seem to calmer with Ypool today. I've been get disconnected many times last night and the night before.
Here's a great guide to setup your Cards in Linux.
http://eligius.st/wiki/index.php/Ubuntu_Miner_Guide (http://eligius.st/wiki/index.php/Ubuntu_Miner_Guide)
-
@Nan. I looked at the README and didn’t find any commands to increase GPU clocks and Memory clocks. I tried the cg miner codes but they don't work. Is there something I'm missing?
-
NaN,
I get the following with 2.2 running against the 14.x drivers downloaded from AMD under linux (Mint 16/Ubuntu Saucy).
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.2.2 (ypool.net only)
** by NaN - based on xptMiner by jh00 (clintar's code v1.1)
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmail.com
** PTS: PajuVUWrcPn5ksCFfrBiWQXvpwtE29dcN2
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 1 (deviceID 0): Hawaii
Fee Percentage: 2.50%. To set, use "-d" flag e.g. "-d 3.5" is 3.5% donation
spawning 2 worker threads
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
Connected to server using x.pushthrough(xpt) protocol
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Hawaii':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 162)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 179)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 169)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 222)
Unrolled as requested!
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
xpt: Logged in with cbyter.PTS_1
WARNING: Linking two modules of different target triples: 'amdil-pc-unknown-amdopencl' and 'amdil-pc-amdopencl'
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'New block data - height: 55679 tx count: 19
barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
WARNING: While resolving call to function 'barrier' arguments were dropped!
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Hawaii':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 162)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 112)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 179)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 169)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 222)
Unrolled as requested!
collisions/min: 3930.0000 Shares total: 0
-
@Nan. I looked at the README and didn’t find any commands to increase GPU clocks and Memory clocks. I tried the cg miner codes but they don't work. Is there something I'm missing? This in Linux/Ubuntu of course.
-
Things seem to calmer with Ypool today. I've been get disconnected many times last night and the night before.
are the ypool miners getting extreme rejection rates like over at beeeer the last two days?
http://mrx.im/pts.php
looks like in 15 hours from the time of this edit, the difficulty will double on PTS?
does clpts have a 10 second timer on if shares are rejected or not? because with heavy server load it seems to take more than 10 seconds for shares found to get submitted and maybe thats why the rejection rate is so high because its hitting the 10 second timer? just taking a stab trying to solve this issue...
-
Things seem to calmer with Ypool today. I've been get disconnected many times last night and the night before.
are the ypool miners getting extreme rejection rates like over at beeeer the last two days?
http://mrx.im/pts.php
looks like in 15 hours from the time of this edit, the difficulty will double on PTS?
does clpts have a 10 second timer on if shares are rejected or not? because with heavy server load it seems to take more than 10 seconds for shares found to get submitted and maybe thats why the rejection rate is so high because its hitting the 10 second timer? just taking a stab trying to solve this issue...
Don't believe so. Unfortunately CLPTS for YPool doesn't report an overall rejection rate. :'(
-
Hello
New install ubuntu+ Drivers No good
rig@rig-System-Product-Name:~$ ./miner.sh
PPLIB command execution has failed!
ati_pplib_cmd: execute "set" failed!
aticonfig: This program must be run as root when no X server is active
aticonfig: This program must be run as root when no X server is active
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v0.2.2 (ypool.net only)
** by NaN - based on xptMiner by jh00 (clintar's code v1.1)
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to: opencl.miner@gmail.com
** PTS: PajuVUWrcPn5ksCFfrBiWQXvpwtE29dcN2
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
error in xptMiner/clInit.cpp, line 96: Method clGetDeviceIDs(...) failed (errorcode -1)
-
please try sudo ./miner.sh.
If someone encounters error -1 one should try to execute the miner with sudo.
-
Hey Nan when are you planning the next release ?
-
can Change the miner for solo mining??
-
There is no need for next release. In 90 minutes difficulty will increase to 0.036... and all the miners will jump to other coins...
-
if the difficulty doubles, earning are divided by two ?
-
Difficulty rised to 0.036228.
-
halving source please? i am new in pts mining.. i am sad if halving is coming :(
-
There is no need for next release. In 90 minutes difficulty will increase to 0.036... and all the miners will jump to other coins...
Pretty much this..lol
18000 CPM for 2 PTS a day..lol
-
Difficulty rised to 0.036228.
And if the mining continues to jump... it will go even higher according to:
http://mrx.im/pts.php
Let's see what happens to mining after the 28th..
-
7500CPM only 0.8254pts a day , Jesus! :'(
-
7500CPM only 0.8254pts a day , Jesus! :'(
in past difficulty . how much u get?
-
7500CPM only 0.8254pts a day , Jesus! :'(
in past difficulty . how much u get?
1.82 pts a day
-
7500CPM only 0.8254pts a day , Jesus! :'(
in past difficulty . how much u get?
1.82 pts a day
owww.. by the way, is there any chance to go to other coins? and what coin is that
-
The difficulty will to double again to 0.05469433 in 4 days. I am done with that coin. Moving to DOGE.
-
7500CPM only 0.8254pts a day , Jesus! :'(
in past difficulty . how much u get?
1.82 pts a day
owww.. by the way, is there any chance to go to other coins? and what coin is that
Could't find better return than it . keep mining it until 28th. :-\
-
@NaN - Have you seen the following on the Ypool version?
Share found! (Blockheight: 56471)
Invalid share
Reason: Share data time overflow
^ I get this for every share I find on my windows 7 machine running 2x R9 280X, this isn't seen on any of my Linux rigs. Your windows Beeeeer version works properly though. Maybe a pool issue?
-
You have to adjust your system clock.
-
That happened to me too even with the "correct" hour and minute set because windows was still incorrectly using the default PST.
-
lets mine until 27. and lets see what happen in PTS rate
I think PTS mining is not profitable now.. In 12hours with 9500 collision I got only 0.29 pts
-
my R9 280x doing 3650 and HD 7950 OC doing 3100 cpm which i think good but R9 290 OC doing only 3000 cpm, any reason ?
win 7 64bit 13.12 , i tried 14.1 and 13.1 , 13.6 but same.
i tried "a" 0 to 3 but its not gonna change the cpm rate
-
my R9 280x doing 3650 and HD 7950 OC doing 3100 cpm which i think good but R9 290 OC doing only 3000 cpm, any reason ?
win 7 64bit 13.12 , i tried 14.1 and 13.1 , 13.6 but same.
i tried "a" 0 to 3 but its not gonna change the cpm rate
it's a windows-problem - linux is doing fine with the 290X working at ~4500 cpm
please read a bit more in this thread
-
NaN do you have plans to release more optimized miner for PTS, if yes when it can happen? :)
Is there possibility to add temperature, fan % and voltages for the GPUs in the miner?
Regards
-
NaN do you have plans to release more optimized miner for PTS, if yes when it can happen? :)
Is there possibility to add temperature, fan % and voltages for the GPUs in the miner?
Regards
+1 because voltage regulation is a serious lack in linux AMD drivers and we all know that cards don't need that much volotage to run... even OC... Thanks a lot :)
-
Should I be running 1 or 2 threads when I use the 270x? Also which algorithm is best for this card ?
-
NaN do you have plans to release more optimized miner for PTS, if yes when it can happen? :)
Is there possibility to add temperature, fan % and voltages for the GPUs in the miner?
Regards
+1 because voltage regulation is a serious lack in linux AMD drivers and we all know that cards don't need that much volotage to run... even OC... Thanks a lot :)
http://sourceforge.net/projects/amdovdrvctrl/?source=navbar
allows you to change voltage unless your card is factory locked in which case the BIOS will have to be edited?
-
Should I be running 1 or 2 threads when I use the 270x? Also which algorithm is best for this card ?
depends... do you have a 2GB or 4GB...
2GB use 1 thread
4GB use 2 thread
I've found -a 1 to be the best but some folks say they've tried the others and have different results, so the best thing to do, try each one for a half hour and see which one did best for you...
-
NaN do you have plans to release more optimized miner for PTS, if yes when it can happen? :)
Is there possibility to add temperature, fan % and voltages for the GPUs in the miner?
Regards
+1 because voltage regulation is a serious lack in linux AMD drivers and we all know that cards don't need that much volotage to run... even OC... Thanks a lot :)
http://sourceforge.net/projects/amdovdrvctrl/?source=navbar
allows you to change voltage unless your card is factory locked in which case the BIOS will have to be edited?
Tried but it says that some functions are not supported by either your hardware, the Catalyst driver or the ADL. List of problems: failed to get fan speed infos and Overdrive parameters. Which makes no sense since OD is activated because both cards (r9 290) are OC and works perfectly. Fan speed is also manually adjusted by command. Didn't manage to get the info if the last available version supports r9 cards or Catalyst 14.1 beta for linux... Any idea?
-
NaN do you have plans to release more optimized miner for PTS, if yes when it can happen? :)
Is there possibility to add temperature, fan % and voltages for the GPUs in the miner?
Regards
+1 because voltage regulation is a serious lack in linux AMD drivers and we all know that cards don't need that much volotage to run... even OC... Thanks a lot :)
http://sourceforge.net/projects/amdovdrvctrl/?source=navbar
allows you to change voltage unless your card is factory locked in which case the BIOS will have to be edited?
Tried but it says that some functions are not supported by either your hardware, the Catalyst driver or the ADL. List of problems: failed to get fan speed infos and Overdrive parameters. Which makes no sense since OD is activated because both cards (r9 290) are OC and works perfectly. Fan speed is also manually adjusted by command. Didn't manage to get the info if the last available version supports r9 cards or Catalyst 14.1 beta for linux... Any idea?
I personally don't know, I run windows, I was just trying to give you an option heh... I'm not sure the 290 series can have the voltage changed without directly accessing the BIOS, and I'm not sure anyone has made a good utility for the 290 series yet (I've seen people ask like crazy but never a good answer)... the 280 and below are cake to modify the BIOS if locked...
-
is PTS still profitable?
-
I say YES,
because mt.gox is offline the BTC is broken, butI think in a few weeks is going up again. So you need at the Moment 37 PTS for 1 BTC, Bitstamp take the lead I think.
I have 1x HD7870 2GB 1500 CPM and 1x R9 270X 4GB 1900 CPM. Tomorrow I get 2 Sapphire 280X makes ca. 7000 CPM, I jave Money to Invest so no Problem for me, but In Germany the electricity
is expensive. With 10000 CPM you make in 30 Days ca. 33 PTS. So its time to make a lot of PTS. When you have 1 Card, forget everything its Gold Rush. When you have a few Rigs and Money to invest you can make Profit. The Time of the BTC comes, in Berlin is the first Germanys BTC Cash Terminal. You can pay with BTC, but you cant MINE BTC.
Is there another good COIN? Dogecoin, Primecoin I dont know.....
PTS is great I think. Kind Regards from Germany
-
i have 3 r9 280x with 10500 collision.. but i am wondering why i only get 0.70 pts, which is not good..
-
FYI I have 2x r9 290 on ubuntu and 8k cpm. Doing 0.8pts a day on ypool.
-
NaN do you have plans to release more optimized miner for PTS, if yes when it can happen? :)
Is there possibility to add temperature, fan % and voltages for the GPUs in the miner?
Regards
+1 because voltage regulation is a serious lack in linux AMD drivers and we all know that cards don't need that much volotage to run... even OC... Thanks a lot :)
http://sourceforge.net/projects/amdovdrvctrl/?source=navbar
allows you to change voltage unless your card is factory locked in which case the BIOS will have to be edited?
Tried but it says that some functions are not supported by either your hardware, the Catalyst driver or the ADL. List of problems: failed to get fan speed infos and Overdrive parameters. Which makes no sense since OD is activated because both cards (r9 290) are OC and works perfectly. Fan speed is also manually adjusted by command. Didn't manage to get the info if the last available version supports r9 cards or Catalyst 14.1 beta for linux... Any idea?
I personally don't know, I run windows, I was just trying to give you an option heh... I'm not sure the 290 series can have the voltage changed without directly accessing the BIOS, and I'm not sure anyone has made a good utility for the 290 series yet (I've seen people ask like crazy but never a good answer)... the 280 and below are cake to modify the BIOS if locked...
I used to be on W8.1 and switched to linux to "insta gain" 1k cm/card. Anyway when on Windows I was able to tweak the voltage of both the cards (saphhire and gigabyte) using MSI AB. So I was wondering why I can't on linux whereas it seems people are ok with that on their side. But I guess r9 29x and not well supported. Only 7xxx and r9 up to 28x series at this time...
-
i monitored it for 24 hours.. but i got only 0.70 .. confirmed and unconfirm :(
-
One or two days ago the difficulty more then doubled from 17 to 36. That is the reason.
-
Hi, thank you for this miner. With ubuntu i have a problem.
After few time the miner stop to work. I have "Connection to server lost - Reconnect in 45 seconds" but the miner close in my console without try reconnect.
collisions/min: 0.0000 Shares total: 1872
collisions/min: 0.0000 Shares total: 1872
collisions/min: 0.0000 Shares total: 1872
Connection to server lost - Reconnect in 45 seconds
Aloec@pc4al:~/Desktop/min$
I dont know if it is my .sh file who bug. Here is my .sh
./clpts -u aloec1.pts -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0
If you can help me please.
-
Hi, thank you for this miner. With ubuntu i have a problem.
After few time the miner stop to work. I have "Connection to server lost - Reconnect in 45 seconds" but the miner close in my console without try reconnect.
collisions/min: 0.0000 Shares total: 1872
collisions/min: 0.0000 Shares total: 1872
collisions/min: 0.0000 Shares total: 1872
Connection to server lost - Reconnect in 45 seconds
Aloec@pc4al:~/Desktop/min$
I dont know if it is my .sh file who bug. Here is my .sh
./clpts -u aloec1.pts -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0
If you can help me please.
Hm, ypool is heavily DDOSed today and something does not work because the miner shows 0 cpm. I do not know whether this is a bug in the miner. Could you send me additional information about your system via PM so I can investigate this issue?
A workaround would be to modify your script so that it restarts the miner every time it exits: while true; do ./clpts -u aloec1.pts -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0; done
EDIT I forgot a 'do'
-
if i can manage to flash my r290 to r290x .Am i going to get 4500 cpm with this miner?Getting around 3900 atm
-
Hi, thank you for this miner. With ubuntu i have a problem.
After few time the miner stop to work. I have "Connection to server lost - Reconnect in 45 seconds" but the miner close in my console without try reconnect.
collisions/min: 0.0000 Shares total: 1872
collisions/min: 0.0000 Shares total: 1872
collisions/min: 0.0000 Shares total: 1872
Connection to server lost - Reconnect in 45 seconds
Aloec@pc4al:~/Desktop/min$
I dont know if it is my .sh file who bug. Here is my .sh
./clpts -u aloec1.pts -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0
If you can help me please.
Hm, ypool is heavily DDOSed today and something does not work because the miner shows 0 cpm. I do not know whether this is a bug in the miner. Could you send me additional information about your system via PM so I can investigate this issue?
A workaround would be to modify your script so that it restarts the miner every time it exits: while true; ./clpts -u aloec1.pts -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0; done
Thank you for help Nan, i send you a mp.
-
Guys, what is the kind of CPM to expect on a 280X?
-
Guys, what is the kind of CPM to expect on a 280X?
I get around 3373 c/m at stock 1000/1500 and 3500 c/m at 1050/1500.
-
any update to suport muli-pool?Ypool always disconect
-
can anybody tell me:Whats the best safe memory gpu and core speed for r290?
-
Today I tried power meter to compare PTS and scrypt mining. I have in one rig 3x7950 and 1x7970 and in PTS mining they consume 800W with scrypt 900W.
In the second rig I have 3x280x and with PTS mining it consumes 560W, with scrypt 760W.
All of my cards are tuned via BIOS and undervolted. Undervolting gives you 30W and 5-7 degrees Celsius less per card, which is acceptable for the labor to edit BIOS-es.
My 280x are running at 1020/1500 with 1131mv, even to overclock them to 1090/1500 with 1225mv it doesn't give me more CPM.
-
can anybody tell me:Whats the best safe memory gpu and core speed for r290?
Having only reference cards (2x r9 290 from sapphire and gigabyte), I can tell on my side:
- gpu clock: 1125
- mem clock: 1300 (but 1270 seems more stable)
- undervolt: -44mV in MSI AB
- fan speed: 63% (ambient room temp around 20-21 degres Celcius) to maintain temp of the cards around 63 degres celcius
A bit loud but works well xD
-
can anybody tell me:Whats the best safe memory gpu and core speed for r290?
There is no clear-cut answer to that as it all depends on your GPU(s). Literarlly,
even between same make/brand/model the ASICs can very. Also, make sure you
have the powersupply(s) to handle the increase as jumping up clocks a little makes
BIG differences in power draw... which is why it's smart to under-volt but then again
if you're under linux (like myself) then the capability doesn't quite exist..
Having said that, my MSI R9 290 Gaming GPUs are over clocked to 1050Mhz/1350Mhz
with PowerTune @ 20% and I keep the fans on constant 85%. The rig run stable though
gets a little toasty with temp ranges from 74C to 81C. It would have been worse had I not
taken off the factory thermal grease and replaced with mucho better grease. Any clocks past
that I found to be unstable given my make/brand/model of GPU.
LAST IMPORTANT NOTE : I run clpts at those clocks. If you try those clocks with cgminer for
other scrypt mining, you better have 350W+ for each card. NaN's clpts is very efficient and
doesn't run as hot as cgminer's less efficient algo. Good luck!
-
can anybody tell me:Whats the best safe memory gpu and core speed for r290?
Having only reference cards (2x r9 290 from sapphire and gigabyte), I can tell on my side:
- gpu clock: 1125
- mem clock: 1300 (but 1270 seems more stable)
- undervolt: -44mV in MSI AB
- fan speed: 63% (ambient room temp around 20-21 degres Celcius) to maintain temp of the cards around 63 degres celcius
A bit loud but works well xD
can anybody tell me:Whats the best safe memory gpu and core speed for r290?
There is no clear-cut answer to that as it all depends on your GPU(s). Literarlly,
even between same make/brand/model the ASICs can very. Also, make sure you
have the powersupply(s) to handle the increase as jumping up clocks a little makes
BIG differences in power draw... which is why it's smart to under-volt but then again
if you're under linux (like myself) then the capability doesn't quite exist..
Having said that, my MSI R9 290 Gaming GPUs are over clocked to 1050Mhz/1350Mhz
with PowerTune @ 20% and I keep the fans on constant 85%. The rig run stable though
gets a little toasty with temp ranges from 74C to 81C. It would have been worse had I not
taken off the factory thermal grease and replaced with mucho better grease. Any clocks past
that I found to be unstable given my make/brand/model of GPU.
LAST IMPORTANT NOTE : I run clpts at those clocks. If you try those clocks with cgminer for
other scrypt mining, you better have 350W+ for each card. NaN's clpts is very efficient and
doesn't run as hot as cgminer's less efficient algo. Good luck!
i am currently getting around 3.9k cpm with 1100/1500 and 4k cpm with 1100/1700cpm with stock voltages fans %45 , cards never passes 73c @linux. 2 cards +whole rig uses 570-580w from the wall.Is that good?
-
i am currently getting around 3.9k cpm with 1100/1500 and 4k cpm with 1100/1700cpm with stock voltages fans %45 , cards never passes 73c @linux. 2 cards +whole rig uses 570-580w from the wall.Is that good?
I'm seriously impressed that you can get GPU memory clocks that high, specially with stock voltages. I'm also seriously impressed that you can run the GPU clock at 1100 and keep the card so cool at such a low fan speed, and all of that at 250W per card. Is this really a R9 290?
-
i am currently getting around 3.9k cpm with 1100/1500 and 4k cpm with 1100/1700cpm with stock voltages fans %45 , cards never passes 73c @linux. 2 cards +whole rig uses 570-580w from the wall.Is that good?
I'm seriously impressed that you can get GPU memory clocks that high, specially with stock voltages. I'm also seriously impressed that you can run the GPU clock at 1100 and keep the card so cool at such a low fan speed, and all of that at 250W per card. Is this really a R9 290?
i can show you my rig picture if you want
-
Guys, what is the kind of CPM to expect on a 280X?
I get around 3373 c/m at stock 1000/1500 and 3500 c/m at 1050/1500.
3500 c/m at which algorithm you run? -1, -2, or -3? My card only has 3200 cpm at -2.
-
Do you guys have any ideas of my problem...
Basically, when I pair up my 7850 and 7950, I can run the 7950 on its own and it gives me around 2500 CPM when I have set it to 1,1 cores. When I pair up my 7950 with another 7950, both of them produce around 700 CPM when I set them to 0,0 and 1,1 respectively. When set these back to 0 and 1 - i.e. single cores, I get them to produce around 1800 CPM.... Any ideas what is wrong? Both the 7950s have 3GB memory. My 7850 has only 2GB memory so I run it on single core but it still produces a respectable 1200CPM
-
I finally got it all working and overclocked. I'm getting 4150cpm with these settings on stock volts. This set of script will overclock your 290/or 290x.
The first line is the core clock, memory clock, powerlevel, and powertune I believe. The max was 2 on the last number. I tried that but a 1 worked better for me so I stuck with that. If I'm doing something that will blow up my card, someone let me know. Temps are under 50c on core all the time and the VRM sinks are barely warm to the touch. When I was on Windows my VRM's were under 50c on VRM1 and under 40 on VRM2, so I should be good.
Here's my OC config if someone wants to try it on theirs:
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-setclocks=1110,1415,150,1
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-commitclocks
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-gettemperature
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-getclocks
this is for Linux of course.
-
I finally got it all working and overclocked. I'm getting 4150cpm with these settings on stock volts. This set of script will overclock your 290/or 290x.
The first line is the core clock, memory clock, powerlevel, and powertune I believe. The max was 2 on the last number. I tried that but a 1 worked better for me so I stuck with that. If I'm doing something that will blow up my card, someone let me know. Temps are under 50c on core all the time and the VRM sinks are barely warm to the touch. When I was on Windows my VRM's were under 50c on VRM1 and under 40 on VRM2, so I should be good.
Here's my OC config if someone wants to try it on theirs:
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-setclocks=1110,1415,150,1
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-commitclocks
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-gettemperature
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-getclocks
this is for Linux of course.
when i copy paste this: aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-setclocks=1110,1415,150,1 and i am getting:
ERROR - Set clocks failed for Adapter 1 - AMD Radeon R9 290 Series
Please check that input values were valid
-
Guys, what is the kind of CPM to expect on a 280X?
I get around 3373 c/m at stock 1000/1500 and 3500 c/m at 1050/1500.
3500 c/m at which algorithm you run? -1, -2, or -3? My card only has 3200 cpm at -2.
-a 3
-
I finally got it all working and overclocked. I'm getting 4150cpm with these settings on stock volts. This set of script will overclock your 290/or 290x.
The first line is the core clock, memory clock, powerlevel, and powertune I believe. The max was 2 on the last number. I tried that but a 1 worked better for me so I stuck with that. If I'm doing something that will blow up my card, someone let me know. Temps are under 50c on core all the time and the VRM sinks are barely warm to the touch. When I was on Windows my VRM's were under 50c on VRM1 and under 40 on VRM2, so I should be good.
Here's my OC config if someone wants to try it on theirs:
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-setclocks=1110,1415,150,1
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-commitclocks
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-gettemperature
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-getclocks
this is for Linux of course.
when i copy paste this: aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-setclocks=1110,1415,150,1 and i am getting:
ERROR - Set clocks failed for Adapter 1 - AMD Radeon R9 290 Series
Please check that input values were valid
Try chaging to adapter 0 instead of 1. Mine would only work with "1", but its in the 0 slot. I have no idea why, so yours might react totally different. IDK.
so it might look like this instead: (or you could even try 2 I suppose also) you may also need lower values. I seem to have a decent card here.
aticonfig --adapter=0 --od-setclocks=1110,1415,150,1
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-commitclocks
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-gettemperature
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-getclocks
-
I finally got it all working and overclocked. I'm getting 4150cpm with these settings on stock volts. This set of script will overclock your 290/or 290x.
The first line is the core clock, memory clock, powerlevel, and powertune I believe. The max was 2 on the last number. I tried that but a 1 worked better for me so I stuck with that. If I'm doing something that will blow up my card, someone let me know. Temps are under 50c on core all the time and the VRM sinks are barely warm to the touch. When I was on Windows my VRM's were under 50c on VRM1 and under 40 on VRM2, so I should be good.
Here's my OC config if someone wants to try it on theirs:
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-setclocks=1110,1415,150,1
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-commitclocks
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-gettemperature
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-getclocks
this is for Linux of course.
when i copy paste this: aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-setclocks=1110,1415,150,1 and i am getting:
ERROR - Set clocks failed for Adapter 1 - AMD Radeon R9 290 Series
Please check that input values were valid
Try chaging to adapter 0 instead of 1. Mine would only work with "1", but its in the 0 slot. I have no idea why, so yours might react totally different. IDK.
so it might look like this instead: (or you could even try 2 I suppose also) you may also need lower values. I seem to have a decent card here. Set your clocks lower and see if they will take. I also changed the adapter to "0" but you may need to try "1" again. Hard to tell.
aticonfig --adapter=0 --od-setclocks=1050,1375,150,1
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-commitclocks
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-gettemperature
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-getclocks
-
Does anybody know the CPM from the Sapphire 270x TOXIC with 2 GB?
or is the 270X 4GB better because you can run2 Threads?
THANKS
-
I finally got it all working and overclocked. I'm getting 4150cpm with these settings on stock volts. This set of script will overclock your 290/or 290x.
The first line is the core clock, memory clock, powerlevel, and powertune I believe. The max was 2 on the last number. I tried that but a 1 worked better for me so I stuck with that. If I'm doing something that will blow up my card, someone let me know. Temps are under 50c on core all the time and the VRM sinks are barely warm to the touch. When I was on Windows my VRM's were under 50c on VRM1 and under 40 on VRM2, so I should be good.
Here's my OC config if someone wants to try it on theirs:
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-setclocks=1110,1415,150,1
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-commitclocks
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-gettemperature
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-getclocks
this is for Linux of course.
when i copy paste this: aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-setclocks=1110,1415,150,1 and i am getting:
ERROR - Set clocks failed for Adapter 1 - AMD Radeon R9 290 Series
Please check that input values were valid
this command is only working for primary adapter I think, because I'm getting the same error for second card. Can anyone give a trick for it?
-
I finally got it all working and overclocked. I'm getting 4150cpm with these settings on stock volts. This set of script will overclock your 290/or 290x.
The first line is the core clock, memory clock, powerlevel, and powertune I believe. The max was 2 on the last number. I tried that but a 1 worked better for me so I stuck with that. If I'm doing something that will blow up my card, someone let me know. Temps are under 50c on core all the time and the VRM sinks are barely warm to the touch. When I was on Windows my VRM's were under 50c on VRM1 and under 40 on VRM2, so I should be good.
Here's my OC config if someone wants to try it on theirs:
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-setclocks=1110,1415,150,1
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-commitclocks
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-gettemperature
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-getclocks
this is for Linux of course.
when i copy paste this: aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-setclocks=1110,1415,150,1 and i am getting:
ERROR - Set clocks failed for Adapter 1 - AMD Radeon R9 290 Series
Please check that input values were valid
this command is only working for primary adapter I think, because I'm getting the same error for second card. Can anyone give a trick for it?
Hate to break the news to you folks but the aticonfig/amdconfig does NOT work for more than one
adapter. Sure there is the --adapter=x or --adapter=all but it only ever works for the default card.
Must be a bug in the software and perhaps next ATI Catalyst will fix it.
-
I finally got it all working and overclocked. I'm getting 4150cpm with these settings on stock volts. This set of script will overclock your 290/or 290x.
The first line is the core clock, memory clock, powerlevel, and powertune I believe. The max was 2 on the last number. I tried that but a 1 worked better for me so I stuck with that. If I'm doing something that will blow up my card, someone let me know. Temps are under 50c on core all the time and the VRM sinks are barely warm to the touch. When I was on Windows my VRM's were under 50c on VRM1 and under 40 on VRM2, so I should be good.
Here's my OC config if someone wants to try it on theirs:
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-setclocks=1110,1415,150,1
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-commitclocks
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-gettemperature
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-getclocks
this is for Linux of course.
when i copy paste this: aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-setclocks=1110,1415,150,1 and i am getting:
ERROR - Set clocks failed for Adapter 1 - AMD Radeon R9 290 Series
Please check that input values were valid
this command is only working for primary adapter I think, because I'm getting the same error for second card. Can anyone give a trick for it?
Hate to break the news to you folks but the aticonfig/amdconfig does NOT work for more than one
adapter. Sure there is the --adapter=x or --adapter=all but it only ever works for the default card.
Must be a bug in the software and perhaps next ATI Catalyst will fix it.
Below is a copy of the current clocks I'm running.
aticonfig --adapter=0 --od-setclocks=1110,1220
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-setclocks=1110,1220
aticonfig --adapter=2 --od-setclocks=1110,1220
aticonfig --adapter=3 --od-setclocks=1110,1220
Adapter 0 - AMD Radeon R9 290 Series
Core (MHz) Memory (MHz)
Current Clocks : 1110 1220
Current Peak : 1110 1220
Configurable Peak Range : [300-1500] [150-2000]
GPU load : 100%
Adapter 1 - AMD Radeon R9 290 Series
Core (MHz) Memory (MHz)
Current Clocks : 1075 1220
Current Peak : 1110 1220
Configurable Peak Range : [300-1500] [150-2000]
GPU load : 100%
Adapter 2 - AMD Radeon R9 290 Series
Core (MHz) Memory (MHz)
Current Clocks : 1110 1220
Current Peak : 1110 1220
Configurable Peak Range : [300-1500] [150-2000]
GPU load : 100%
Adapter 3 - AMD Radeon R9 290 Series
Core (MHz) Memory (MHz)
Current Clocks : 1110 1220
Current Peak : 1110 1220
Configurable Peak Range : [300-1500] [150-2000]
GPU load : 100%
-
The first line is the core clock, memory clock, powerlevel, and powertune I believe.
aticonfig --adapter=1 --od-setclocks=1110,1415,150,1
It is know that powertune values can vary from -20% to 20%. What do I have to expect if I use the following; Any chance cards will consumme less power without reducing stock clocks?
aticonfig --adapter=all --od-setclocks=x,y,90,1
I'm running stock clocks and stock voltage (but all cards are powertune certified and have unlock Bios).
Thanks.
-
Do you guys have any ideas of my problem...
Basically, when I pair up my 7850 and 7950, I can run the 7950 on its own and it gives me around 2500 CPM when I have set it to 1,1 cores. When I pair up my 7950 with another 7950, both of them produce around 700 CPM when I set them to 0,0 and 1,1 respectively. When set these back to 0 and 1 - i.e. single cores, I get them to produce around 1800 CPM.... Any ideas what is wrong? Both the 7950s have 3GB memory. My 7850 has only 2GB memory so I run it on single core but it still produces a respectable 1200CPM
Can anyone help please?
-
Does anybody know the CPM from the Sapphire 270x TOXIC with 2 GB?
or is the 270X 4GB better because you can run2 Threads?
THANKS
i get 1600-1700 from an msi 270 2gb (not 270x)
i imagine the 4gb version is better, i dunno though.
my 260 with 2gb of mem can get 1300
-
I wish this miner is supported by Smos-linux ...
-
ypool down again? its very unstable these days.
is there a way to add beeeeer.org as the backup pool?
please implement failover pool features
also optimize the miner for win7+290(x)
thanks
-
I'm working on it, but the R9 290(X) weakness in Windows is not my fault. It is something driver related.
-
can you release a version without pool restriction?
everyday ypool will be down at least 50% of time (due to ddos, according to the moderator from ypool) and I also don't like ypool's restriction of minimal 1 pst for automatic payout
-
Again, I'm working on it. This requires some major code rewrites.
Edit I'm testing one version with only one protocol now. Additionally protocols will be implemented soon.
-
I didn't noticed that it involves some major code rewrites. I was assuming it's a piece of cake since pools use the same xpt protocol.
Sorry NaN
-
I meant the pool fallback and I'm targeting more stable code because I do not have enough time to support people all the day. I have only a xpt6 version, which ypool does use. But all other pools use xpt5. I hacked something together but I'm not sure whether this is stable because 1GH has major problems with this version. Only ptspool.com seems to be ok but shows sometimes strange behaviour, too.
-
appreciate your effort.
-
appreciate your effort.
hi 12hao.Glad to meet you here :)
-
I meant the pool fallback and I'm targeting more stable code because I do not have enough time to support people all the day. I have only a xpt6 version, which ypool does use. But all other pools use xpt5. I hacked something together but I'm not sure whether this is stable because 1GH has major problems with this version. Only ptspool.com seems to be ok but shows sometimes strange behaviour, too.
this argument would hold more water if the people you were 'supporting' werent paying you much more than you'd make as a salaryman or an hourly wage doing the same type of work. how about a 'i'm busy' instead? surely you dont expect people to increase the 'donation' rate
for all the ppl complaining, just switch miners. i have on all but one gpu (cause i'm like .15 short of a payout, hah)
-
I've been mining on YPool for most of the week since Be^5r is having trouble finding blocks. I only switch to it when YPool is down.
-
any news? please
-
hmm.. on pool? it's probably another ddos attack
-
I meant the pool fallback and I'm targeting more stable code because I do not have enough time to support people all the day. I have only a xpt6 version, which ypool does use. But all other pools use xpt5. I hacked something together but I'm not sure whether this is stable because 1GH has major problems with this version. Only ptspool.com seems to be ok but shows sometimes strange behaviour, too.
everyday ypool will be down....
can NaN support more pool.....
yam is suppport all pool...
-
black lotus pls.
-
PTS will be cancelled and there is no reason to mine it. BTS is the successor...
-
Hi NAN,
what ist with auroracoin? what the other think about it?
Its gettin very high in the next days...
http://coinmarketcap.com/
Position 3 , PTS was 10
-
PTS will be cancelled and there is no reason to mine it. BTS is the successor...
You should state your words more accurately...
"You think PTS will be canceled and you think that there is no reason to mine them... "
Please take time to understand that undervaluing other's ideas as less profitable ways of making money does not always represent what you think to be obvious.
-
Hi NAN,
what ist with auroracoin? what the other think about it?
Its gettin very high in the next days...
http://coinmarketcap.com/
Position 3 , PTS was 10
Scrypt 50% premined ... will get distributed over all iceland population in 20 days or so.. until there price will go high.. .. after.. it will drop like a lead stone..
Diff is very high right now.. and it's difficult to get coins.. and there are too many pools that make even more difficult to get centralized distribution of coins..
-
Hi NAN,
what ist with auroracoin? what the other think about it?
Its gettin very high in the next days...
http://coinmarketcap.com/
Position 3 , PTS was 10
Scrypt 50% premined ... will get distributed over all iceland population in 20 days or so.. until there price will go high.. .. after.. it will drop like a lead stone..
Diff is very high right now.. and it's difficult to get coins.. and there are too many pools that make even more difficult to get centralized distribution of coins..
Thanks for the answer
-
Well. Suck.
Is PTS dead and gone? Who's still mining this?
Are there any other coins we can mine that pay better that use this miner?
This sucks.
-
Ykw look at www.invictus.io the movie...
-
Ykw look at www.invictus.io the movie...
I have... and? =)
DACs are still there and many will come. PTS will eventually speed up again.. once the diff goes down.. due the lack of mining effort after the low interest.
You are assuming too much if you guys think that PTS is dead... just an advice... I am not telling you that it is the most profitable coin... just telling you that the coin will still be doing some nasty stuff...
-
known issues: GPUs needs about 1.2GB free GPU RAM.
Any chance for a 1 GB version?
Got a few 7850 1 GB and would love to mine PTS with them.
-
known issues: GPUs needs about 1.2GB free GPU RAM.
Any chance for a 1 GB version?
Got a few 7850 1 GB and would love to mine PTS with them.
I have a 6750 1GB works much better with ptsgpuz0.4c (424 cpm vs 275 cpm)
Not sure which miner is better for 1GB version of GCN.
-
Ykw The next diff will be changed after almost 40 days according to mrx.im...
-
Ykw The next diff will be changed after almost 40 days according to mrx.im...
=) you are free to think what you want =)
-
So I'm running the miner on Win7 either the beer or ypool the latest 1.4+ 2.2+ using 13.12 and 3x R9 290X. After 3-5 hours (or sometimes right away)the CPM will just start to slow down and drop till it reaches nothing. If I restart the miner it will go back to normal and the same thing will happen. Any idea's on how to fix this issue? It's annoying me to hell.
The output of the program will also just list the CPM and the falling numbers right after another and nothing else.
-
So I'm running the miner on Win7 either the beer or ypool the latest 1.4+ 2.2+ using 13.12 and 3x R9 290X. After 3-5 hours the CPM will just start to slow down and drop till it reaches nothing. If I restart the miner it will go back to normal and the same thing will happen. Any idea's on how to fix this issue? It's annoying me to hell.
The output of the program will also just list the CPM and the falling numbers right after another.
Are you getting any accepted shares? Do they decline over time too?
-
So I'm running the miner on Win7 either the beer or ypool the latest 1.4+ 2.2+ using 13.12 and 3x R9 290X. After 3-5 hours the CPM will just start to slow down and drop till it reaches nothing. If I restart the miner it will go back to normal and the same thing will happen. Any idea's on how to fix this issue? It's annoying me to hell.
The output of the program will also just list the CPM and the falling numbers right after another.
Are you getting any accepted shares? Do they decline over time too?
I get a bunch of Share found!! Share found!! works as normal then all of a sudden it will just list the cpm and no more shares found etc just will count down till it reaches zero.
-
So I'm running the miner on Win7 either the beer or ypool the latest 1.4+ 2.2+ using 13.12 and 3x R9 290X. After 3-5 hours the CPM will just start to slow down and drop till it reaches nothing. If I restart the miner it will go back to normal and the same thing will happen. Any idea's on how to fix this issue? It's annoying me to hell.
The output of the program will also just list the CPM and the falling numbers right after another.
Are you getting any accepted shares? Do they decline over time too?
I get a bunch of Share found!! Share found!! works as normal then all of a sudden it will just list the cpm and no more shares found etc just will count down till it reaches zero.
Post some more details.. for me it looks fine.
Is it something related to your ISP/router/scheduler? Can you try it from a different ISP? Place?
It's quite strange the 5/6 hours time frame... try to check what could be happening by that window of time. Are you mining both pools same time and having the same exact issue at the exact same time?
Also investigate since when you are having this issue..
Basic skills of troubleshooting does not involve any technical skills.. only.. parts exclusions...
To be able to reject possible situations is the most important part.
-
So I'm running the miner on Win7 either the beer or ypool the latest 1.4+ 2.2+ using 13.12 and 3x R9 290X. After 3-5 hours the CPM will just start to slow down and drop till it reaches nothing. If I restart the miner it will go back to normal and the same thing will happen. Any idea's on how to fix this issue? It's annoying me to hell.
The output of the program will also just list the CPM and the falling numbers right after another.
Are you getting any accepted shares? Do they decline over time too?
I get a bunch of Share found!! Share found!! works as normal then all of a sudden it will just list the cpm and no more shares found etc just will count down till it reaches zero.
Post some more details.. for me it looks fine.
Is it something related to your ISP/router/scheduler? Can you try it from a different ISP? Place?
It's quite strange the 5/6 hours time frame... try to check what could be happening by that window of time. Are you mining both pools same time and having the same exact issue at the exact same time?
Also investigate since when you are having this issue..
Basic skills of troubleshooting does not involve any technical skills.. only.. parts exclusions...
To be able to reject possible situations is the most important part.
It's not always 5-6 hours sometimes it's shorter sometimes it's longer sometimes within a few min. I Just used that as an example. It seems like it's totally random when it happens. I had the output for the monitor on a display port cable then I thought perhaps there's an issue with recognizing a monitor after it turns itself off then I swapped to a dvi and it seemed to work fine for a while then the issue came back.
I'm really puzzled by this as it doesn't make any sense as to why it will just mess up like this.
-
So I'm running the miner on Win7 either the beer or ypool the latest 1.4+ 2.2+ using 13.12 and 3x R9 290X. After 3-5 hours the CPM will just start to slow down and drop till it reaches nothing. If I restart the miner it will go back to normal and the same thing will happen. Any idea's on how to fix this issue? It's annoying me to hell.
The output of the program will also just list the CPM and the falling numbers right after another.
Are you getting any accepted shares? Do they decline over time too?
I get a bunch of Share found!! Share found!! works as normal then all of a sudden it will just list the cpm and no more shares found etc just will count down till it reaches zero.
Post some more details.. for me it looks fine.
Is it something related to your ISP/router/scheduler? Can you try it from a different ISP? Place?
It's quite strange the 5/6 hours time frame... try to check what could be happening by that window of time. Are you mining both pools same time and having the same exact issue at the exact same time?
Also investigate since when you are having this issue..
Basic skills of troubleshooting does not involve any technical skills.. only.. parts exclusions...
To be able to reject possible situations is the most important part.
It's not always 5-6 hours sometimes it's shorter sometimes it's longer sometimes within a few min. I Just used that as an example. It seems like it's totally random when it happens. I had the output for the monitor on a display port cable then I thought perhaps there's an issue with recognizing a monitor after it turns itself off then I swapped to a dvi and it seemed to work fine for a while then the issue came back.
I'm really puzzled by this as it doesn't make any sense as to why it will just mess up like this.
Just keep a third window.. pinging the mining host you are miming to.. and you will see if it is something because of you.. or not.
NOTE: LOG it, with timestamps.. cause it's going to be a big output! And use different workers for different GPUs performances..
-
So I'm running the miner on Win7 either the beer or ypool the latest 1.4+ 2.2+ using 13.12 and 3x R9 290X. After 3-5 hours the CPM will just start to slow down and drop till it reaches nothing. If I restart the miner it will go back to normal and the same thing will happen. Any idea's on how to fix this issue? It's annoying me to hell.
The output of the program will also just list the CPM and the falling numbers right after another.
Are you getting any accepted shares? Do they decline over time too?
I get a bunch of Share found!! Share found!! works as normal then all of a sudden it will just list the cpm and no more shares found etc just will count down till it reaches zero.
Post some more details.. for me it looks fine.
Is it something related to your ISP/router/scheduler? Can you try it from a different ISP? Place?
It's quite strange the 5/6 hours time frame... try to check what could be happening by that window of time. Are you mining both pools same time and having the same exact issue at the exact same time?
Also investigate since when you are having this issue..
Basic skills of troubleshooting does not involve any technical skills.. only.. parts exclusions...
To be able to reject possible situations is the most important part.
It's not always 5-6 hours sometimes it's shorter sometimes it's longer sometimes within a few min. I Just used that as an example. It seems like it's totally random when it happens. I had the output for the monitor on a display port cable then I thought perhaps there's an issue with recognizing a monitor after it turns itself off then I swapped to a dvi and it seemed to work fine for a while then the issue came back.
I'm really puzzled by this as it doesn't make any sense as to why it will just mess up like this.
Just keep a third window.. pinging the mining host you are miming to.. and you will see if it is something because of you.. or not.
NOTE: LOG it, with timestamps.. cause it's going to be a big output! And use different workers for different GPUs performances..
So how do I go about logging it? And any specific command just to chain ping the host?
-
So I'm running the miner on Win7 either the beer or ypool the latest 1.4+ 2.2+ using 13.12 and 3x R9 290X. After 3-5 hours the CPM will just start to slow down and drop till it reaches nothing. If I restart the miner it will go back to normal and the same thing will happen. Any idea's on how to fix this issue? It's annoying me to hell.
The output of the program will also just list the CPM and the falling numbers right after another.
Are you getting any accepted shares? Do they decline over time too?
I get a bunch of Share found!! Share found!! works as normal then all of a sudden it will just list the cpm and no more shares found etc just will count down till it reaches zero.
Post some more details.. for me it looks fine.
Is it something related to your ISP/router/scheduler? Can you try it from a different ISP? Place?
It's quite strange the 5/6 hours time frame... try to check what could be happening by that window of time. Are you mining both pools same time and having the same exact issue at the exact same time?
Also investigate since when you are having this issue..
Basic skills of troubleshooting does not involve any technical skills.. only.. parts exclusions...
To be able to reject possible situations is the most important part.
It's not always 5-6 hours sometimes it's shorter sometimes it's longer sometimes within a few min. I Just used that as an example. It seems like it's totally random when it happens. I had the output for the monitor on a display port cable then I thought perhaps there's an issue with recognizing a monitor after it turns itself off then I swapped to a dvi and it seemed to work fine for a while then the issue came back.
I'm really puzzled by this as it doesn't make any sense as to why it will just mess up like this.
Just keep a third window.. pinging the mining host you are miming to.. and you will see if it is something because of you.. or not.
NOTE: LOG it, with timestamps.. cause it's going to be a big output! And use different workers for different GPUs performances..
So how do I go about logging it? And any specific command just to chain ping the host?
Don't you have linux? LOL kiding...
tons.. of ways... depending on what you want... but just check things on this thread (http://www.computerhope.com/forum/index.php?topic=120285.0).. and learn as much as you can about what you see...
8)
Lame EDIT: To give you motivation.. just watch minute 5:55 of this video ([remove]https[remove]:/[remove]/[remove]w.w.w.y.o.u.t.u.b.e.c.o.m./watch?v=g3m3PdvTuHg) ... I won't post anymore of this =) sorry...
-
any update regarding the new version?
-
Does anyone know why they won't change the diff on this coin? Seems the high diff is what is killing PTS, or am I wrong?
-
It has been discussed here too...
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=3356.0
-
any update regarding the new version?
The new miner will be released in the next few days if there are no further delays.
-
Hi,
Is it possible to run this miner on SMOS ?
If it is, how to compile under smos ?
Tnx!
-
The miner seems to crash if I try to run more than 10 threads
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 8 (deviceID 0): Tahiti
Name of device #2 / 8 (deviceID 1): Tahiti
Name of device #3 / 8 (deviceID 2): Tahiti
Name of device #4 / 8 (deviceID 3): Tahiti
Name of device #5 / 8 (deviceID 4): Tahiti
Name of device #6 / 8 (deviceID 5): Tahiti
Name of device #7 / 8 (deviceID 6): Tahiti
Name of device #8 / 8 (deviceID 7): Tahiti
Fee Percentage: 2.50%. To set, use "-d" flag e.g. "-d 3.5" is 3.5% donation
*** glibc detected *** ./clpts: malloc(): memory corruption: 0x0000000001bbc0d0 ***
Hopefully you can fix this in the next version, is there any update on that btw? What protocols will it support?
-
The miner seems to crash if I try to run more than 10 threads
You have to launch several instances. Got the same problem with 8 threads, depends on your login size, will be fixed in next release with config files support
-
I stopped mining a few weeks ago because difficulty is too high in relation to the col/min on the network.
I started up my miner yesterday for an hour and my 7970 is only getting ~1600 col/min where it was getting ~2900col/min before. Windows 7 64, HD7970 . Anyone know why this happened? If difficulty drops, I'd like to mine again but would like to at the col/min levels I was getting before.
-
First of all thank you NaN software provides great
Your software can support other pools such as
http://upcpu.com/
http://ptspool.com/
These pools are supported xpt protocol
You can charge the cost of the software
y pools often unstable
beee too small
-
still waiting for a new version... :)
-
Hi NaN， is the new version ready?
any update regarding the new version?
The new miner will be released in the next few days if there are no further delays.
-
I think NaN is waiting the new difficulty and then he will release the miner :)
-
The new version v1.0 with multi-pool support and pool fallback. I'm sorry that the miner is late but I had not much time in the last weeks.
-
The new version v1.0 with multi-pool support and pool fallback. I'm sorry that the miner is late but I had not much time in the last weeks.
Thanks man...
Does it need the new beta AMD SDK?
I am getting this now.. (with previous miner I had to do nothing):
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v1.0 by NaN
**
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to:
opencl.miner@gmail.com
** PTS: PajuVUWrcPn5ksCFfrBiWQXvpwtE29dcN2
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 2 (deviceID 0): Hawaii
Name of device #2 / 2 (deviceID 1): Pitcairn
[MASTER] | Spawning 2 worker threads
[WORKER[WORKER1] Hello, World!
0] Hello, World!
Error during compilation of program for device 'Pitcairn':
Internal error: Input OpenCL binary is not for the target!
EDIT: It only give me that for: device #2 / 2 (deviceID 1): Pitcairn
Win 7k SP1 + latest non-beta AMD drivers
-
Any chance to support http://pts.1gh.com/ pool?
-
The new version v1.0 with multi-pool support and pool fallback. I'm sorry that the miner is late but I had not much time in the last weeks.
Thanks man...
Does it need the new beta AMD SDK?
I am getting this now.. (with previous miner I had to do nothing):
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v1.0 by NaN
**
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to:
opencl.miner@gmail.com
** PTS: PajuVUWrcPn5ksCFfrBiWQXvpwtE29dcN2
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 2 (deviceID 0): Hawaii
Name of device #2 / 2 (deviceID 1): Pitcairn
[MASTER] | Spawning 2 worker threads
[WORKER[WORKER1] Hello, World!
0] Hello, World!
Error during compilation of program for device 'Pitcairn':
Internal error: Input OpenCL binary is not for the target!
EDIT: It only give me that for: device #2 / 2 (deviceID 1): Pitcairn
Win 7k SP1 + latest non-beta AMD drivers
Oh, I published the binaries instead of the LLVMIR code... Perhaps you can just use the old gpuhash_* files. I'm working on a fix. edit: fixed
-
D:\挖矿\clpts-v1.0a_win_x86-64>clpts_x86-64 -o 1,2,3,4,6 PsYGu95S3PwoPcUyNrXr
m2G8DuTZ5Zx -u visterln.3 -p 123 -t 0
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v1.0 by NaN
**
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to:
opencl.miner@gmail.com
** PTS: PajuVUWrcPn5ksCFfrBiWQXvpwtE29dcN2
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#2 / 2): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 1 (deviceID 0): Tahiti
[MASTER] | Spawning 1 worker threads
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Frontend phase failed compilation.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
failed to connect (system:10038) to
D:\挖矿\clpts-v1.0a_win_x86-64>pause
请按任意键继续. . .
one is ok,copy then to another can't use
-
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 280)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 283)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 104)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 108)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 301)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 291)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 344)
Unrolled as requested!
[WORKER0] share found: 58609646 <-> 1331195 #1 (38) @ 1395808578
[WORKER1] share found: 17465944 <-> 36277127 #2 (76) @ 1395808579
[WORKER0] share found: 31757772 <-> 7538041 #3 (180) @ 1395808581
[WORKER0] share found: 45480414 <-> 6604672 #4 (244) @ 1395808582
[WORKER0] share found: 18079157 <-> 19456418 #5 (328) @ 1395808585
[WORKER1] share found: 50822066 <-> 63980906 #6 (338) @ 1395808585
12:36:23 | 2840 c/m | 40 sh/m | VL: 6 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (
[WORKER0] share found: 63705419 <-> 54641043 #7 (440) @ 1395808587
[WORKER1] share found: 8252175 <-> 30064781 #8 (510) @ 1395808588
[WORKER0] share found: 7622558 <-> 2340396 #9 (530) @ 1395808589
[WORKER1] share found: 65125920 <-> 16212906 #10 (808) @ 1395808595
12:36:33 | 2836 c/m | 31.58 sh/m | VL: 10 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST:
0%)
[WORKER1] share found: 11706678 <-> 43800862 #11 (988) @ 1395808599
[WORKER0] share found: 3218003 <-> 65621373 #12 (996) @ 1395808599
[WORKER0] share found: 13944191 <-> 2447015 #13 (1052) @ 1395808599
[WORKER0] share found: 19274638 <-> 34309101 #14 (1076) @ 1395808600
[WORKER1] share found: 25681318 <-> 56714239 #15 (1298) @ 1395808605
[WORKER1] share found: 5751041 <-> 11692027 #16 (1402) @ 1395808607
12:36:43 | 2901 c/m | 33.1 sh/m | VL: 15 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST:
%)
[WORKER1] share found: 44134656 <-> 50843794 #17 (1438) @ 1395808608
[WORKER0] share found: 55976055 <-> 20663521 #18 (1468) @ 1395808608
[WORKER0] share found: 27070109 <-> 4216192 #19 (1626) @ 1395808611
[WORKER1] share found: 47279948 <-> 53648122 #20 (1678) @ 1395808612
[WORKER1] share found: 10214756 <-> 9697616 #21 (1836) @ 1395808615
12:36:53 | 2963 c/m | 32.31 sh/m | VL: 21 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST:
0%)
[WORKER0] share found: 45806542 <-> 35119185 #22 (1966) @ 1395808618
[WORKER1] share found: 31052299 <-> 9516162 #23 (2224) @ 1395808624
[WORKER1] share found: 61593818 <-> 52893208 #24 (2224) @ 1395808624
12:37:03 | 2868 c/m | 29.39 sh/m | VL: 24 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST:
0%)
[WORKER0] share found: 63021165 <-> 66135029 #25 (2434) @ 1395808629
Try to login with PbbEd9kG97WvT5hNpksxXnDJcd4xtncdXm
[WORKER0] share found: 36928273 <-> 64662829 #26 (2660) @ 1395808634
[WORKER0] share found: 44765314 <-> 17658095 #27 (2706) @ 1395808635
[WORKER1] share found: 36868987 <-> 64896767 #28 (2772) @ 1395808637
[INFO] @ 12:37:13 | mining 36s for developer
[WORKER1] share found: 18083955 <-> 41050686 #29 (2780) @ 1395808637
12xpt: Logged in with PsYGu95S3PwoPcUyNrXrkHjm2G8DuTZ5Zx
:37:13[MASTER] @ 12:37:13| 2780 c/m | 29 sh/m | VL: 28 (100| work recei
haretarget 0x.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%)
0333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333333
[WORKER1] share found: 25286571 <-> 63929660 #30 (2862) @ 1395808634
[WORKER1] share found: 17029249 <-> 63978540 #31 (2920) @ 1395808635
[WORKER0] share found: 13774113 <-> 63612703 #32 (2940) @ 1395808636
[WORKER0] share found: 63177690 <-> 45127260 #33 (3028) @ 1395808638
[WORKER1] share found: 42955653 <-> 16647847 #34 (3090) @ 1395808639
[WORKER0] share found: 65986411 <-> 8332615 #35 (3148) @ 1395808641
[WORKER1] share found: 12405668 <-> 36880159 #36 (3202) @ 1395808642
12:37:23 | 2790 c/m | 31.3 sh/m | VL: 35 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST:
%)
[WORKER1] share found: 9871968 <-> 43553221 #37 (3316) @ 1395808644
[WORKER0] share found: 38586517 <-> 48605115 #38 (3332) @ 1395808645
[WORKER0] share found: 42229908 <-> 60650630 #39 (3360) @ 1395808645
[WORKER0] share found: 44055530 <-> 40146175 #40 (3390) @ 1395808646
[WORKER0] share found: 47286755 <-> 18007259 #41 (3442) @ 1395808647
[WORKER0] share found: 18874537 <-> 65491916 #42 (3460) @ 1395808648
[WORKER12:1] share found: 62187893 <-> 38533974 #43 (3658) @ 1395808652
37[WORKER0] share found: 22477912 <-> 64098953 #44 (3844) @ 1395808652
:[WORKER0] share found: 62874763 <-> 53282494 #45 (3844) @ 1395808652
3[WORKER0] share found: 2376338 <-> 7910793 #46 (3844) @ 1395808654
3 | 2919 c/m | 34.94 sh/m | VL: 41 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.0
[WORKER0] share found: 25615033 <-> 2516261 #47 (3890) @ 1395808656
[WORKER0] share found: 11142896 <-> 21635386 #48 (3922) @ 1395808657
[WORKER0] share found: 48173447 <-> 23539992 #49 (3940) @ 1395808658
[WORKER1] share found: 9269562 <-> 17754570 #50 (3954) @ 1395808658
Try to login with PsYGu95S3PwoPcUyNrXrkHjm2G8DuTZ5Zx
[WORKER0] share found: 57753242 <-> 35364579 #51 (4004) @ 1395808659
[WORKER1] share found: 54332661 <-> 49304159 #52 (4046) @ 1395808660
[WORKER1] share found: 11730544 <-> 3896325 #53 (4076) @ 1395808661
[INFO] @ 12:37:44 | mining 30min for user
12:3xpt: Logged in with PsYGu95S3PwoPcUy7:44 | NrXrkHjm2G8DuTZ5Z2784 c/m
35.33 [MASTER] sh/m | VL: 52 (@ 100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%)
12:37:44 | work received | sharetarget 0x03333333333333333333333333333333
3333333333333333333333333
[WORKER1] share found: 23469495 <-> 835081 #54 (4230) @ 1395808667
[WORKER0] share found: 65223336 <-> 16218618 #55 (4248) @ 1395808668
[WORKER1] share found: 59453249 <-> 12707490 #56 (4326) @ 1395808669
12:37:53 | 2764 c/m | 33.94 sh/m | VL: 55 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST:
0%)
[WORKER1] share found: 20240488 <-> 56273427 #57 (4596) @ 1395808676
try log again and again,why ??
-
That looks fine. The login messages are in your case due to developer fee ("[INFO] @ 12:37:13 | mining 36s for developer" and "[INFO] @ 12:37:44 | mining 30min for user". After your snippet there should be no login messages for half an hour. Some pools sometimes close the connection but then "connection closed" appears.
-
D:\挖矿\clpts-v1.0a_win_x86-64>clpts_x86-64 -o 1,2,3,4,6 PsYGu95S3PwoPcUyNrXr
m2G8DuTZ5Zx -u visterln.3 -p 123 -t 0
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v1.0 by NaN
**
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to:
opencl.miner@gmail.com
** PTS: PajuVUWrcPn5ksCFfrBiWQXvpwtE29dcN2
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#2 / 2): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 1 (deviceID 0): Tahiti
[MASTER] | Spawning 1 worker threads
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Frontend phase failed compilation.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
failed to connect (system:10038) to
D:\挖矿\clpts-v1.0a_win_x86-64>pause
请按任意键继续. . .
one is ok,copy then to another can't use
Perhaps this issue is caused by the driver. Which driver version do you use? I used Catalyst 14.2 beta to compile to LLVMIR because with the latest drivers people got some nasty warnings when using the older versions. As workaround you can try to use the old gpuhash_* files.
-
updata 14.3 is OK.
But the 7950 speed is down,from 5800 to 4200,2* 7950,looks the 14.3 get down,used 0.22 the same.which driver is good for 1.0 on 7950?
-
updata 14.3 is OK.
But the 7950 speed is down,from 5800 to 4200,2* 7950,looks the 14.3 get down,used 0.22 the same.which driver is good for 1.0 on 7950?
I do not have access to non R9 290 cards (the day after tomorrow I will have one). If the old gpuhash files have faster performance then it is an issue of the new code, but I only removed some overhead and I didn't change the algorithm. Otherwise the newer drivers caused the performance drop. Or did I misunderstand you and both versions are slower with Catalyst 14.3?
-
Hi,
I also have
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Frontend phase failed compilation.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
with 13.12 on Ubuntu.
Maybe adding a note to use beta catalysts with v1.0 is in order? 8)
I will wait before switching 'til you get your hands on a Tahiti card and fix perf if needed.
-
When you plan to support Nvidia GPU?
-
The new version v1.0 with multi-pool support and pool fallback. I'm sorry that the miner is late but I had not much time in the last weeks.
Thanks man...
Does it need the new beta AMD SDK?
I am getting this now.. (with previous miner I had to do nothing):
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v1.0 by NaN
**
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to:
opencl.miner@gmail.com
** PTS: PajuVUWrcPn5ksCFfrBiWQXvpwtE29dcN2
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 2 (deviceID 0): Hawaii
Name of device #2 / 2 (deviceID 1): Pitcairn
[MASTER] | Spawning 2 worker threads
[WORKER[WORKER1] Hello, World!
0] Hello, World!
Error during compilation of program for device 'Pitcairn':
Internal error: Input OpenCL binary is not for the target!
EDIT: It only give me that for: device #2 / 2 (deviceID 1): Pitcairn
Win 7k SP1 + latest non-beta AMD drivers
Oh, I published the binaries instead of the LLVMIR code... Perhaps you can just use the old gpuhash_* files. I'm working on a fix. edit: fixed
Using the version 1.0a I just get the same error as user justmwa for both cards, using AMD 13.12 drivers with win7 SP1 x64:
Hi,
I also have
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Frontend phase failed compilation.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
with 13.12 on Ubuntu.
Maybe adding a note to use beta catalysts with v1.0 is in order? 8)
I will wait before switching 'til you get your hands on a Tahiti card and fix perf if needed.
If I switch the "gpuhash_*" files for the "clpts-v0.1.4_win_x86-64" version... they work fine. Same performance.. my best run over the 290X is using -a 1 (not 0)
-
No stratum/getwork support? I was hoping for those so I could use the this miner for NoirShares as well. Would you be interested in supporting NoirShares along with PTS? It's the same PoW algo, but it's lacking xpt pools.
-
great stuff v1.0a
i have hd7970 3gb on ypool.net win7 64x 1000 mhz core and 1325 mhz memory and newest beta driver from amd
with v0.2.2 was the sharerate 175-180 share/h option a1 and 1 thread
with v1.0a now i get 250-275 share/h preference is the same
2400 col before 1600 col
-
Ok, I will install Catalyst 13.12 and create a version for older Catalyst drivers.
EDIT: done
-
the miner reconect the pool every 15 minutes? Thats right?
after 8 hours 2421 c/m v1.0a
nrs or stratum support would be great
-
I'm working on stratum support. Which pool do you use because the miner should reconnect by itself only every 30min but then twice within 36s if you do not use ypool? If ypool is used then the miner does not reconnect by itself unless the server closes the connection or an error occurs. As I mentioned earlier some servers close the connection occasionally.
-
To give some feedback:
Running fine, but only at catalyst 14.3beta (as told before).
I got 7150 cpm with 2x 280x @ default clock, win7-64 at ypool (-t 0,0,1,1 -a 2)
Thank you for the good work! :)
-
I'm working on stratum support. Which pool do you use because the miner should reconnect by itself only every 30min but then twice within 36s if you do not use ypool? If ypool is used then the miner does not reconnect by itself unless the server closes the connection or an error occurs. As I mentioned earlier some servers close the connection occasionally.
i'm using ypool.net too. is about separately every 15 minutes, I think
clpts_x86-64.exe -o 6 -u workername.1 -p x -t 0.0 -a 1
and 15min late
-
That's not an issue of the miner because the connection is closed by ypool.net.
-
ok its too fast ;)
but with v0.2.2 it was not so
-
I will be giving this a try within the next couple of days. It looks like I will see a hefty speed increase on all my cards (280x/290x).
-
ok its too fast ;)
but with v0.2.2 it was not so
It is the same "issue" with the old miner, but it did not report any reconnects because it is based on the jhProtominer code.
-
ok
but for 290X is better Options a 1 (3250c/m) as a 0 (3050c/m)
-
Is failover the only new update to the miner? Because my col/min dropped about 30% with this new one and share/min was even lower.
-
Hrm..
error in gpuhash.cpp, line 79: Method clCreateBuffer(...) for binned_data failed (errorcode -61)
trying cat14.3b1 on Ubuntu 13.10.
edit: I ran aticonfig --initial with no screen attached, and it generated a running X conf with no resolution. After putting one and rebooting, no problem anymore.
-
To fix the glibc issue run
sudo add-apt-repository ppa:ubuntu-toolchain-r/test
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install libstdc++
Try this version for some card：
270x Win7 64bit 13.12 system hang, 0.22 is ok
280x Win7 64bit 13.12 ok
290 Win7 64 14.1 ok, but slow
290 ubuntu 12.04 64bit 13.12, get following error(both 13 and 14 binary), but 0.22 is ok
./clpts:/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6: version "GLIBCXX_3.4.18' not found(required by ./clpts)
./clpts:/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6: version "GLIBCXX_3.4.19' not found(required by ./clpts)
So I have to use 290 in ubuntu with version 0.22
Is it some driver version error?
The new version v1.0 with multi-pool support and pool fallback. I'm sorry that the miner is late but I had not much time in the last weeks.
-
Is failover the only new update to the miner? Because my col/min dropped about 30% with this new one and share/min was even lower.
Which graphics card do you use and what is your driver? On my 280x the Catalyst 13.12 was much faster than Catalyst 14.2 beta and 14.3 beta. I removed some overhead so that I expect that the new version should be a little bit faster than the old one. Also let it run long enough to get good statistics.
-
i was using v.022 flawless @linux but when i try to launch clpts-v1.0a_linux_x86-64_Catalyst14 the miner just opens and closes .My .sh file
#!/bin/bash
./clpts -o 0,6 -u ozzy.PTS_1 -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 2
what am i doing wrong?
-
You're using a pool that requires a valid payout address (-o 0). The correct syntax would be
./clpts -o 0,6 <payout-address> -u ozzy.PTS_1 -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 2
-
You're using a pool that requires a valid payout address (-o 0). The correct syntax would be
./clpts -o 0,6 <payout-address> -u ozzy.PTS_1 -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 2
ok i did this:
#!/bin/bash
./clpts -o 0,6 <Pezz4JUPfpAFTSSwWgp1TMpCcS1YvEqVsn> -u ozzy.PTS_1 -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 2
but still same :/
-
I used C++11 for the new miner. Is your glibc up to date? Perhaps I should revert to boost and statically link it. Which distro do you use?
EDIT: Oh, the correct syntax is
./clpts -o 0,6 Pezz4JUPfpAFTSSwWgp1TMpCcS1YvEqVsn -u ozzy.PTS_1 -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 2
-
I used C++11 for the new miner. Is your glibc up to date? Perhaps I should revert to boost and statically link it. Which distro do you use?
EDIT: Oh, the correct syntax is
./clpts -o 0,6 Pezz4JUPfpAFTSSwWgp1TMpCcS1YvEqVsn -u ozzy.PTS_1 -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 2
yea i also tried the ./clpts -o 0,6 Pezz4JUPfpAFTSSwWgp1TMpCcS1YvEqVsn -u ozzy.PTS_1 -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 2
but it didnt work .And i dont know if i have the latest c++11 i dont know much about linux (i am using ubuntu 12.04 )
edit i manage to install but :
installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.5-dbg but 4.5.3-12ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.6-dbg but 4.6.4-1ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
libstdc++6-4.7-doc : Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.4-doc but 4.4.7-1ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.5-doc but 4.5.3-12ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.6-doc but 4.6.4-1ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
libstdc++6-4.8-dbg : Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.4-dbg but 4.4.7-1ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.5-dbg but 4.5.3-12ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.6-dbg but 4.6.4-1ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.7-dbg but 4.7.3-2ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
-
Is failover the only new update to the miner? Because my col/min dropped about 30% with this new one and share/min was even lower.
Which graphics card do you use and what is your driver? On my 280x the Catalyst 13.12 was much faster than Catalyst 14.2 beta and 14.3 beta. I removed some overhead so that I expect that the new version should be a little bit faster than the old one. Also let it run long enough to get good statistics.
HD 7970. I let I run for about 20 minutes. I let it go longer today.
-
The new version v1.0 with multi-pool support and pool fallback. I'm sorry that the miner is late but I had not much time in the last weeks.
Would you considering to support pts.upcpu.com? We are supporting xpt protocol now.
-
I'm trying to run the Miner on Linux Xubuntu but it's sayinh No GPU find with Device Id 0 , tried with 1 too. Running only one GPU on this machine, and I run cgminer with no problem. Catalyst 13
Any ideas?
-
So did anyone figure out how to adjust two or more AMD cards in Linux while using this miner?
-
I used C++11 for the new miner. Is your glibc up to date? Perhaps I should revert to boost and statically link it. Which distro do you use?
EDIT: Oh, the correct syntax is
./clpts -o 0,6 Pezz4JUPfpAFTSSwWgp1TMpCcS1YvEqVsn -u ozzy.PTS_1 -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 2
yea i also tried the ./clpts -o 0,6 Pezz4JUPfpAFTSSwWgp1TMpCcS1YvEqVsn -u ozzy.PTS_1 -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 2
but it didnt work .And i dont know if i have the latest c++11 i dont know much about linux (i am using ubuntu 12.04 )
edit i manage to install but :
installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.5-dbg but 4.5.3-12ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.6-dbg but 4.6.4-1ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
libstdc++6-4.7-doc : Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.4-doc but 4.4.7-1ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.5-doc but 4.5.3-12ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.6-doc but 4.6.4-1ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
libstdc++6-4.8-dbg : Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.4-dbg but 4.4.7-1ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.5-dbg but 4.5.3-12ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.6-dbg but 4.6.4-1ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.7-dbg but 4.7.3-2ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
I got the same error with Ubuntu 12.04, I solved it by
sudo apt-get install libstdc++6
-
I'm trying to run the Miner on Linux Xubuntu but it's sayinh No GPU find with Device Id 0 , tried with 1 too. Running only one GPU on this machine, and I run cgminer with no problem. Catalyst 13
Any ideas?
I got the same error with Catalyst 13.12. Upgraded my Catalyst to latest 14 beta (currently 14.3 beta) solved it.
-
Hi NaN,
Thanks for the latest miner!
It's working fine in Win7 64bit with latest 14.3 beta drivers, but it doesn't work with win 8.1 64bit with 13.12 drivers, R9 270, R9 280x or R9 290 cards.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
-
Hi NaN,
Thanks for the latest miner!
It's working fine in Win7 64bit with latest 14.3 beta drivers, but it doesn't work with win 8.1 64bit with 13.12 drivers, R9 270, R9 280x or R9 290 cards.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
Use beta drivers.. or use old gpu_hash files from previous versions.
-
Still not working with Catalyst 14.3 in Xubuntu :/ Using the latest 1.0 version made for CAT 14
I have no idea why it's saying there's no supported card, if cgminer is running fine!
-
Hi NaN,
Thanks for the latest miner!
It's working fine in Win7 64bit with latest 14.3 beta drivers, but it doesn't work with win 8.1 64bit with 13.12 drivers, R9 270, R9 280x or R9 290 cards.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
Use beta drivers.. or use old gpu_hash files from previous versions.
I'm bond with stock drivers with win 8.1, because only with them I got all six cards runing without problems.
Thanks for the tip, using old gpu_hash files did the trick for now!
-
Hi NaN,
Thanks for the latest miner!
It's working fine in Win7 64bit with latest 14.3 beta drivers, but it doesn't work with win 8.1 64bit with 13.12 drivers, R9 270, R9 280x or R9 290 cards.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
As you may have noticed there are different files for Catalyst 13.12 and Catalyst 14.x drivers. You have to use the *Catalyst13 files for Catalyst 13.12
-
Hi NaN,
Thanks for the latest miner!
It's working fine in Win7 64bit with latest 14.3 beta drivers, but it doesn't work with win 8.1 64bit with 13.12 drivers, R9 270, R9 280x or R9 290 cards.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
As you may have noticed there are different files for Catalyst 13.12 and Catalyst 14.x drivers. You have to use the *Catalyst13 files for Catalyst 13.12
You mean Gpu_hash files or driver files ? If driver files which and how shoul I replace them ? Just copy over the old ones or ?
Tnx
-
Hi NaN,
Thanks for the latest miner!
It's working fine in Win7 64bit with latest 14.3 beta drivers, but it doesn't work with win 8.1 64bit with 13.12 drivers, R9 270, R9 280x or R9 290 cards.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
As you may have noticed there are different files for Catalyst 13.12 and Catalyst 14.x drivers. You have to use the *Catalyst13 files for Catalyst 13.12
You mean Gpu_hash files or driver files ? If driver files which and how shoul I replace them ? Just copy over the old ones or ?
Tnx
NaN wanted you to understand that in his download links... there are 2 set of files (miner+gpu_hash files), ones are for 13.12 drivers.. the other for the beta 14.x version. So you should download the correct version to run over the correct driver you are using.
The gpu_hash switch trick was before he posted that fix.
-
Ah I get it now :D
Tnx !
-
I updated the miner to v1.1, which solves some issues and adds support for the upcpu.com-pool.
-
Cool!
I updated the miner to v1.1, which solves some issues and adds support for the upcpu.com-pool.
-
PoolID 7: upcpu.com (xptspool.upcpu.com:8080-8087, xpt5)
XPT version 6 had been supported in upcpu.com. It's better than v5.
I updated the miner to v1.1, which solves some issues and adds support for the upcpu.com-pool.
-
Ok, I will test xpt6 on upcpu.com.
-
I updated the miner to v1.1, which solves some issues and adds support for the upcpu.com-pool.
Thanks! You forgot to update the banner though 8)
-
I used C++11 for the new miner. Is your glibc up to date? Perhaps I should revert to boost and statically link it. Which distro do you use?
EDIT: Oh, the correct syntax is
./clpts -o 0,6 Pezz4JUPfpAFTSSwWgp1TMpCcS1YvEqVsn -u ozzy.PTS_1 -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 2
yea i also tried the ./clpts -o 0,6 Pezz4JUPfpAFTSSwWgp1TMpCcS1YvEqVsn -u ozzy.PTS_1 -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 2
but it didnt work .And i dont know if i have the latest c++11 i dont know much about linux (i am using ubuntu 12.04 )
edit i manage to install but :
installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.5-dbg but 4.5.3-12ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.6-dbg but 4.6.4-1ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
libstdc++6-4.7-doc : Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.4-doc but 4.4.7-1ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.5-doc but 4.5.3-12ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.6-doc but 4.6.4-1ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
libstdc++6-4.8-dbg : Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.4-dbg but 4.4.7-1ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.5-dbg but 4.5.3-12ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.6-dbg but 4.6.4-1ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.7-dbg but 4.7.3-2ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
I got the same error with Ubuntu 12.04, I solved it by
sudo apt-get install libstdc++6
it also doesnt work
i am geting :
libstdc++6 is already the newest version.
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 57 not upgraded.
btw i am using amd-catalyst-14.1-betav1.3-linux-x86.x86_64 drivers
-
And I was hoping for a version which runs with 1 GB cards. (7850 1 GB)
:(
-
I wanted to do PTS mining in my XUbuntu 13.10 , but no idea why the miner isn't recognizing my AMD card :/
-
Is your xorg.conf ok and is a X-server running? Otherwise you have to run the miner with sudo.
-
Tried with Sudo.
Pretty sure everything is OK otherwise I wouldn't be able to mine with cgminer.
-
I used C++11 for the new miner. Is your glibc up to date? Perhaps I should revert to boost and statically link it. Which distro do you use?
EDIT: Oh, the correct syntax is
./clpts -o 0,6 Pezz4JUPfpAFTSSwWgp1TMpCcS1YvEqVsn -u ozzy.PTS_1 -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 2
yea i also tried the ./clpts -o 0,6 Pezz4JUPfpAFTSSwWgp1TMpCcS1YvEqVsn -u ozzy.PTS_1 -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 2
but it didnt work .And i dont know if i have the latest c++11 i dont know much about linux (i am using ubuntu 12.04 )
edit i manage to install but :
installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.5-dbg but 4.5.3-12ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.6-dbg but 4.6.4-1ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
libstdc++6-4.7-doc : Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.4-doc but 4.4.7-1ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.5-doc but 4.5.3-12ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.6-doc but 4.6.4-1ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
libstdc++6-4.8-dbg : Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.4-dbg but 4.4.7-1ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.5-dbg but 4.5.3-12ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.6-dbg but 4.6.4-1ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.7-dbg but 4.7.3-2ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
I got the same error with Ubuntu 12.04, I solved it by
sudo apt-get install libstdc++6
it also doesnt work
i am geting :
libstdc++6 is already the newest version.
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 57 not upgraded.
btw i am using amd-catalyst-14.1-betav1.3-linux-x86.x86_64 drivers
You have libstdc++6-4.4 installed and probably have multiple sources.. with different names of the same package... try to remove all the libstdc++ and dependent packages and then install them again.. but using only one source. This is not a miner problem.. it's an OS config know how...
If you are uncomfortable with ubunto.. try other OSs you are ok with... you have fedora, centos, windows.. etc etc...
Otherwise.. post more details. (the more you can get)
-
Tried with Sudo.
Pretty sure everything is OK otherwise I wouldn't be able to mine with cgminer.
Can you post the output? Are you using/booting into single user mode (init 3) ? Is "startx" command working?
-
Is your xorg.conf ok and is a X-server running? Otherwise you have to run the miner with sudo.
can you tell me what am i doing wrong?I am trying for 3 days but cant run the newest miner :/
-
I don't want to mess too much with my Linux because it's working flawless for CgMiner! If I Start doing stuff to it, I will probably crash it, and since I have no Linux experience, the only way will be a complete Format :/
Here's the tutorial I followed
https://www.weminecryptos.com/forum/topic/2187-guide-housing-xubuntu-setup-amd-drivers-kdev-sd-cgminer-monitoring-and-vbios-flashing/
The output is simply No GPU Device with the id.
-
Hi folks....
You have to understand that if you want help you have to give back something.. just saying that it does not work.. doesn't help anyone nor it will be enough for anyone from the community to help.
Try to be logic... when you have a problem.. share the errors, configs, when problem started to happen, when it did not.. etc etc...
There are no magic within devs... they are all hard working geeks =)
-
I don't want to mess too much with my Linux because it's working flawless for CgMiner! If I Start doing stuff to it, I will probably crash it, and since I have no Linux experience, the only way will be a complete Format :/
Here's the tutorial I followed
https://www.weminecryptos.com/forum/topic/2187-guide-housing-xubuntu-setup-amd-drivers-kdev-sd-cgminer-monitoring-and-vbios-flashing/
The output is simply No GPU Device with the id.
What you have in this "aticonfig --lsa"...
EDIT: Share the actual output of the miner when you try to run it
-
I don't want to mess too much with my Linux because it's working flawless for CgMiner! If I Start doing stuff to it, I will probably crash it, and since I have no Linux experience, the only way will be a complete Format :/
Here's the tutorial I followed
https://www.weminecryptos.com/forum/topic/2187-guide-housing-xubuntu-setup-amd-drivers-kdev-sd-cgminer-monitoring-and-vbios-flashing/
The output is simply No GPU Device with the id.
That sounds like you're using wrong command line arguments. Could you post the output of the miner and your command line arguments?
-
I used C++11 for the new miner. Is your glibc up to date? Perhaps I should revert to boost and statically link it. Which distro do you use?
EDIT: Oh, the correct syntax is
./clpts -o 0,6 Pezz4JUPfpAFTSSwWgp1TMpCcS1YvEqVsn -u ozzy.PTS_1 -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 2
yea i also tried the ./clpts -o 0,6 Pezz4JUPfpAFTSSwWgp1TMpCcS1YvEqVsn -u ozzy.PTS_1 -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 2
but it didnt work .And i dont know if i have the latest c++11 i dont know much about linux (i am using ubuntu 12.04 )
edit i manage to install but :
installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.5-dbg but 4.5.3-12ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.6-dbg but 4.6.4-1ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
libstdc++6-4.7-doc : Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.4-doc but 4.4.7-1ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.5-doc but 4.5.3-12ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.6-doc but 4.6.4-1ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
libstdc++6-4.8-dbg : Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.4-dbg but 4.4.7-1ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.5-dbg but 4.5.3-12ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.6-dbg but 4.6.4-1ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.7-dbg but 4.7.3-2ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
I got the same error with Ubuntu 12.04, I solved it by
sudo apt-get install libstdc++6
it also doesnt work
i am geting :
libstdc++6 is already the newest version.
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 57 not upgraded.
btw i am using amd-catalyst-14.1-betav1.3-linux-x86.x86_64 drivers
Did you try to use v1.1? If it does not work I can give you a statically linked version of the miner so there are no dependencies on OS-libraries. The disadvantage is that the binaries become several MB large.
-
Is there any performance improvement with version 1.x compared against 0.2.2?
-
I used C++11 for the new miner. Is your glibc up to date? Perhaps I should revert to boost and statically link it. Which distro do you use?
EDIT: Oh, the correct syntax is
./clpts -o 0,6 Pezz4JUPfpAFTSSwWgp1TMpCcS1YvEqVsn -u ozzy.PTS_1 -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 2
yea i also tried the ./clpts -o 0,6 Pezz4JUPfpAFTSSwWgp1TMpCcS1YvEqVsn -u ozzy.PTS_1 -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 2
but it didnt work .And i dont know if i have the latest c++11 i dont know much about linux (i am using ubuntu 12.04 )
edit i manage to install but :
installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.5-dbg but 4.5.3-12ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.6-dbg but 4.6.4-1ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
libstdc++6-4.7-doc : Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.4-doc but 4.4.7-1ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.5-doc but 4.5.3-12ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.6-doc but 4.6.4-1ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
libstdc++6-4.8-dbg : Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.4-dbg but 4.4.7-1ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.5-dbg but 4.5.3-12ubuntu2 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.6-dbg but 4.6.4-1ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
Conflicts: libstdc++6-4.7-dbg but 4.7.3-2ubuntu1~12.04 is to be installed
E: Unable to correct problems, you have held broken packages.
I got the same error with Ubuntu 12.04, I solved it by
sudo apt-get install libstdc++6
it also doesnt work
i am geting :
libstdc++6 is already the newest version.
0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 57 not upgraded.
btw i am using amd-catalyst-14.1-betav1.3-linux-x86.x86_64 drivers
Did you try to use v1.1? If it does not work I can give you a statically linked version of the miner so there are no dependencies on OS-libraries. The disadvantage is that the binaries become several MB large.
yes i couldntmake v1.1 when i click the run in terminal window the miner window just opens and closes, v0.2.2 works ok
-
Could you post the output of the miner and your config?
-
Could you post the output of the miner and your config?
i do as what it says here:
http://www.overclock.net/t/1462655/guide-nvidia-amd-pts-gpu-mining/3000_100#post_21775115
#!/bin/bash
./clpts -o 0,6 Pezz4JUPfpAFTSSwWgp1TMpCcS1YvEqVsn -u ozzy.PTS_1 -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 2
-
Could you execute ./clpts -o 0,6 Pezz4JUPfpAFTSSwWgp1TMpCcS1YvEqVsn -u ozzy.PTS_1 -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2 -a 2 directly in your bash (first switch to the folder of the miner)? I need the output of the miner otherwise I won't be able to solve your problem.
-
i am a beginner linux user and dont know how to execute the bash :/
-
http://postimg.org/image/41gv95svv/
Here's the output I got!
Hope you guys can help me.
Did try that with Sudo as well, same output
-
@ozzy: Press alt + F2 and type Terminal. After that navigate to the folder of the miner using cd.
-
http://postimg.org/image/41gv95svv/
Here's the output I got!
Hope you guys can help me.
Did try that with Sudo as well, same output
Which Catalyst version is installed? Are there multiple cards installed (I'm wondering what * - Default adapter means)? If there are multiple cards you have to run sudo aticonfig --adapter=all --initial and then reboot. Furthermore, is there a running X-server because OpenCL does only work without X-server, if there is a not too old Catalyst version installed and if the application is run with sudo (that is not best practice because of security reasons)? Could you post the output of dmesg | grep -i fglrx?
-
Just one card. The Motherboard also has an onboard adapter, which is not in use. So I don't think it has any influence.
Catalyst 14.3 Beta.
How do I know if X-Server is running?
Could you tell me what this line of command does? I just want to know what I'm messing with!
Thanks
-
Is the onboard adapter a AMD or Intel adapter? Perhaps you can PM me your xorg.conf.
If ps -A | grep X shows any non-void output then a X-server is running. Did you install one Catalyst version first and then another? This could wreck the driver if the old version is not removed cleanly. Another possibility is that you did not install all necessary packages before installing the driver. This guide helps http://wiki.cchtml.com/index.php/Ubuntu_Saucy_Installation_Guide but make sure you use the right code-name of your Ubuntu version.
-
Here you go!
http://postimg.org/image/6m1zxbzsp/
The onboard is Intel!
-
Hm, this seems to be ok. Perhaps running fglrxinfo reveals some errors but my guess is that the installation of the driver is incomplete. Which guide did you use (not using a guide will certainly fail for beginners)?
-
https://www.weminecryptos.com/forum/topic/2187-guide-housing-xubuntu-setup-amd-drivers-kdev-sd-cgminer-monitoring-and-vbios-flashing/
Used this guide. No errors, everything went perfect.
-
I do not know which card are you using because the your linked guide says "Important: I suggest going with 13.11 since 14.x seems to break stuff for basically all 290 users."
-
@ozzy: Press alt + F2 and type Terminal. After that navigate to the folder of the miner using cd.
you want me to open termnal window?because alt+f2 t opens this:
(http://i.hizliresim.com/KdQ6Nr.png) (http://hizliresim.com/KdQ6Nr)
-
Click on the icon in the left bar, below the one that looks like a keyboard. It's the black screen looking one with ">_" in it.
I'm afraid there seems to be an effort across all OS's to make things less obvious or more touchscreen like and that includes Ubuntu's custom desktop-UI.
-
@ozzy: Press alt + F2 and type Terminal. After that navigate to the folder of the miner using cd.
i think this time correct:
(http://i.hizliresim.com/ek2J2A.png) (http://hizliresim.com/ek2J2A)
-
I'm using a Gigabyte 280X. I tried before with the 13 Cat, same output. :/
-
Once there went something with the Catalyst wrong it is very difficult to repair the damage (on Linux). I guess that the best thing is to try a fresh Ubuntu installation.
-
Once there went something with the Catalyst wrong it is very difficult to repair the damage (on Linux). I guess that the best thing is to try a fresh Ubuntu installation.
here check this now please:
(http://i.hizliresim.com/wOWy54.png) (http://hizliresim.com/wOWy54)
-
Just launch mine.sh, like this --> ./mine.sh
-
Does anybody want to test a Linux 32bit binary? I'm not running a 32bit Linux environment, so there is no guarantee that it will work. Download https://www.dropbox.com/s/3d2gg0fobujtt5h/clpts_x86 and copy the file into the same folder as the other files.
-
Just launch mine.sh, like this --> ./mine.sh
oz@oz:~/Documents/miner2$ ./mine.sh
bash: ./mine.sh: Permission denied
-
Just launch mine.sh, like this --> ./mine.sh
oz@oz:~/Documents/miner2$ ./mine.sh
bash: ./mine.sh: Permission denied
chmod +x ./mine.sh
sudo ./mine.sh
-
Just launch mine.sh, like this --> ./mine.sh
oz@oz:~/Documents/miner2$ ./mine.sh
bash: ./mine.sh: Permission denied
chmod +x ./mine.sh
sudo ./mine.sh
.oz@oz:~/Documents/miner2$ sudo ./mine.sh
[sudo] password for oz:
./clpts: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.17' not found (required by ./clpts)
oz@oz:~/Documents/miner2$
i think i am missing some file
-
Just launch mine.sh, like this --> ./mine.sh
oz@oz:~/Documents/miner2$ ./mine.sh
bash: ./mine.sh: Permission denied
chmod +x ./mine.sh
sudo ./mine.sh
.oz@oz:~/Documents/miner2$ sudo ./mine.sh
[sudo] password for oz:
./clpts: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.17' not found (required by ./clpts)
oz@oz:~/Documents/miner2$
i think i am missing some file
You don't have a compatible distribution... or you have older glibc...
Do:
cat /etc/issue
-
Just launch mine.sh, like this --> ./mine.sh
oz@oz:~/Documents/miner2$ ./mine.sh
bash: ./mine.sh: Permission denied
never mind at last there is a newest version v1.0a and it works flawless
chmod +x ./mine.sh
sudo ./mine.sh
.oz@oz:~/Documents/miner2$ sudo ./mine.sh
[sudo] password for oz:
./clpts: /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.17' not found (required by ./clpts)
oz@oz:~/Documents/miner2$
i think i am missing some file
You don't have a compatible distribution... or you have older glibc...
Do:
cat /etc/issue
-
Everything is fine with v1.1a_linux.
-
Everything is fine with v1.1a_linux.
thanks alot :D
edit:my miner gets this message every 15 mins or so and reconnect to the pool:
connection closed
Try to login with ozzy.PTS_1
xpt: Logged in with ozzy.PTS_1
[MASTER] @ 00:31:53 | work received | sharetarget 0x0080000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
[WORKER3] share found: 29872325 <-> 37765551 #392 (188102) @ 1396560711
-
I thought I might give PTS-mining a shot for the hell of it and I´m trying this program. Is there any way to monitor or adjust temperatures and fan-speeds from within the program? If not are there any programs for linux that could do that for me with an AMD R9-280X?
What kind of c/m-value should I be seeing for a 280X? My power usage is on the low side, so I'm worried I'm not using the full power of the gpu.
-
Is there any way to get more than ~3300cpm out of my 290x ?
I tried it with the latest beta driver but it does not make a difference.
-
Today the difficulty will drop to 10. Let's see how opencl pts miner will perform :)
-
Is there any way to get more than ~3300cpm out of my 290x ?
I tried it with the latest beta driver but it does not make a difference.
I don't have a 290x but I am running a 280x and getting 3,320 cpm so you should be above that. I am using this flag on the x86-64 version -t 1,1 -a 1
-
Is there any way to get more than ~3300cpm out of my 290x ?
I tried it with the latest beta driver but it does not make a difference.
Switch to linux. Run cgminer/sgminer and set your powertune to +20, now do incremental overclocking until you find your stable clocks. I currently run at 1100/1250 (Core/Memory) and I get about ~4500 c/m per 290X.
-
Is anyone using any tutorial to get Linux ready for PTS? The one I use obviously don't like PTS Miner.
-
Is there any way to get more than ~3300cpm out of my 290x ?
I tried it with the latest beta driver but it does not make a difference.
Switch to linux. Run cgminer/sgminer and set your powertune to +20, now do incremental overclocking until you find your stable clocks. I currently run at 1100/1250 (Core/Memory) and I get about ~4500 c/m per 290X.
Can you undervolt it in cgminer under Linux also ? I got about 3600 c/m with 290 at stock clocks 925/1250Mhz
-
Is there any way to get more than ~3300cpm out of my 290x ?
I tried it with the latest beta driver but it does not make a difference.
I don't have a 290x but I am running a 280x and getting 3,320 cpm so you should be above that. I am using this flag on the x86-64 version -t 1,1 -a 1
I'm use 280x Gigabyte 4X Each rig i getting 14350 per rig with OC
-
Which Catalyst version do you use ?
Is there any way to get more than ~3300cpm out of my 290x ?
I tried it with the latest beta driver but it does not make a difference.
I don't have a 290x but I am running a 280x and getting 3,320 cpm so you should be above that. I am using this flag on the x86-64 version -t 1,1 -a 1
I'm use 280x Gigabyte 4X Each rig i getting 14350 per rig with OC
-
What's wrong with my rid ? It's show like this
Invalid share
Reason : Share data time overflow
How can i solve it ?
-
What's wrong with my rid ? It's show like this
Invalid share
Reason : Share data time overflow
How can i solve it ?
Check your computer date.
-
What's wrong with my rid ? It's show like this
Invalid share
Reason : Share data time overflow
How can i solve it ?
Check your computer date.
Thank you very much! It's OK now. :)
-
Still no version that works with 1GB (7xxx) cards :'(
-
I tried the 32-bit Linux version on BAMT and I get:
./clpts: /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.15' not found (required by ./clpts)
Perhaps you could statically link libstdc++? Or let me know what I can try.
I guess the version is too low on BAMT:
$ strings /usr/lib/libstdc++.so.6 | grep GLIBCXX
GLIBCXX_3.4
GLIBCXX_3.4.1
GLIBCXX_3.4.2
GLIBCXX_3.4.3
GLIBCXX_3.4.4
GLIBCXX_3.4.5
GLIBCXX_3.4.6
GLIBCXX_3.4.7
GLIBCXX_3.4.8
GLIBCXX_3.4.9
GLIBCXX_3.4.10
GLIBCXX_3.4.11
GLIBCXX_3.4.12
GLIBCXX_3.4.13
GLIBCXX_FORCE_NEW
GLIBCXX_DEBUG_MESSAGE_LENGTH
EDIT: I managed to get that working by using a newer version of libstdc++, but now I get an error from clpts:
[MASTER] | Spawning 4 worker threads
[WORKER3] Hello, World!
[WORKER2] Hello, World!
[WORKER1] Hello, World!
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Frontend phase failed compilation.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
EDIT2: I saw now how to fix that in this thread, works great now! Thanks!
-
HI there ,can U do something for the NRS ,please!antother coin like PTS, but the CLptsminer do not support for the pool!
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=565623.0
-
Vendor of used platform (#2 / 2): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 2 (deviceID 0): Pitcairn
Name of device #2 / 2 (deviceID 1): Pitcairn
[MASTER] | Spawning 10 worker threads
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
[WORKER3] Hello, World!
[WORKER4] Hello, World!
[WORKER8] Hello, World![WORKER2] Hello, World!
[WORKER5] Hello, World![WORKER7] Hello, World!
[WORKER9] Hello, World!
[WORKER6] Hello, World!
[WORKER1] Hello, World!
Try to login with oldpioner.old1
connected to ypool.net:8083
xpt: Logged in with oldpioner.old1
[MASTER] @ 20:30:22 | work received | sharetarget 0x0080000000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000000000crash
how to run?
clpts_x86-64 -o 6 PZqTZmi1ZaRc1pfEvHiDHeXCjCJCRGuy7L -u oldpioner.old1 -p 4444 -a 1
pause
-
on ypool.net without adress only username and password
-
I've updated the miner to version v1.2, which introduces large performance improvements, 32bit Linux support and NRS support. The command line interface has changed, too.
-
Thanks NaN !
-
I've tried running the 1.2 version on my 280X gpu, but the program doesn't seem to find the gpu. I crosschecked for problems by running cgminer, but there are no issues there. Any idea why clpts is not seeing any gpus, am I missing an environment variable or something?
-
Linux or Windows? Perhaps you executed the wrong binary (32bit vs. 64bit) or you used the *Catalyst14 files together with Catalyst 13.x. Please post your command line options, your OS version, the Catalyst version and the output of clpts.
-
Ubuntu 64bit, but not upgraded to the recent 14 version.
I'm logging in remotely via ssh, could that be an issue? It sees AMD it does not recognize the card and says there is no gpu with identifier "0" (nor any other identifier for that matter.
-
If you used the 64bit binary (clpts), then you could try to set the DISPLAY variable via export DISPLAY=:0 and to run the miner with sudo. This is required if there is no running X server.
-
If you used the 64bit binary (clpts), then you could try to set the DISPLAY variable via export DISPLAY=:0 and to run the miner with sudo. This is required if there is no running X server.
Yeah it was the Display=:0 variable, thanks. Very strange that I did not need to set that before, but anyway it works now.
-
Hi, NaN
upcpu pool supports NRS now, would you please add this pool into clpts?
the pool server is xnrspool.ucpool.net port:8080 ~ 8087
thanks.
-
Ok, I will test it this evening.
-
Version 1.2 (NSR) - Catalyst 13 (Windows 7 64bit)
290X (2 thread) - 4550 col/m
270X (1 thread) - 2250 col/m
-
Version 1.2 (NSR) - Catalyst 13 (Windows 7 64bit)
290X (2 thread) - 4550 col/m
270X (1 thread) - 2250 col/m
ty this version of catalyst AMD Catalyst Komplettpaket (13.352.1001) WHQL
and use clpts-v1.2_win_x86-64_Catalyst14
-
Normally I'd rather not mess with a running system, but is the upgrade to Catalyst14 really that big of an improvement?
-
Normally I'd rather not mess with a running system, but is the upgrade to Catalyst14 really that big of an improvement?
You must have a "test" system.. then.. you move to the miners..
And indeed it's better..
After changing to latest... Catalyst available.. I got...
290X (2 thread) - 4679 col/m (from 4579 for 30 min)...
270X (1 thread) - 2465 col/m (from 2279 for 30 min)...
still stabilizing...
EDIT: I have a X58 Board overclocked... and I found it.. limiting in terms of some CPU+GPU memory intensive communication... so.. I get probably lower results than others...
-
NaN... great work.. I found this version.. of catalyst 14 with more room for improvement than with catalyst 13... I think they got the power usage better... so.. more room for overclocking... under same col/m performance.
I am still not sure if there something "way badly behaving" with the CPU+GPU communication under PTS/NRS... with the Bitcoin miners.. I get much higher temps.. and less stress over CPU.. much higher TEMPs.. but better (lower) with Catalyst 14 again... so.. I might guess there is more efficient code.. running over the driver.. still.. there is room for improvement from AMD...
Looking at the comm.. of the driver.. there are too much repetition... from AMD compared with NVIDIA... this is... what I found to be the main "lack of HP force" from AMD compared with NVIDIA.. but apart from that.. the drivers.. history.. are way better! I think.. that.. AMD is trying to play the APU card with this issue in time... to overcome their excessive communication.. (in my opinion). NVIDIA.. is somehow playing this type of game since versions 500.. already...
well.. I like what I see.. =) heeeee =)
-
I think I've also got some bandwidth issues with my 280X, as a tradeoff my temperature and power usage is very low in comparison to full load of the gpu.
I setup a cheap motherboard + cpu in a remote and cool part of my house and I'm dangling the gpu outside of the case with an pci-riser-cable, so those 2 factors combined might be limiting me to well below the 5000 value mentioned in the first post. Then again I'm running without any overclock, don't know if that has a large impact on the collision-speed.
-
No, there should be no pci-e bandwidth limitations because only a few bytes and the program code is transferred over pci-e. The quoted performance was for a factory overclocked 280X, so subtract 10% to get a performance estimate for a reference card. I used Catalyst 13.12 because Catalyst 14.4 was slower. Could you post your command line options?
-
No, there should be no pci-e bandwidth limitations because only a few bytes and the program code is transferred over pci-e. The quoted performance was for a factory overclocked 280X, so subtract 10% to get a performance estimate for a reference card. I used Catalyst 13.12 because Catalyst 14.4 was slower.
Yes.. i acknowledge that.. NaN.. but my overclock simply... slowed down my timings plus some errors/instability I might be having... due to high voltage.. CPU+GPU latency... to get better CPU+RAM throughput... and CPU overclock... so.. in my case.. and my board.. I know I have some limitations.. but.. I have done some tests over the other boards (Zxx) and the performance quite goes further up.. with same GPU cards...
Another big detail.. is that I am using a test system with a CPU+BOARD+RAM.. that is running for............ well.. since 2009... 24/7... only the CPU changed... once... free upgrade... to xeon. So.. it might have some issues.. It's ok.. for a 30 day... loop (system restart + WC water refill + windows updates + other hardware experiences)..
I might have a new test board.. by August.. or September... for free.. so by then.. I will have updated performance metrics... tests... tuning.. etc... one thing is for sure.. I have never had.. a system that could last so much!.. nor I think I will have it again.. 5 years!! and counting!
keep up... catalyst 14 is only good for 290X.. or 290.. the others.. are still optimized for catalyst 13... but.. things... will change.. =) new specs... of 3xx series... will come by end of 2014 =) I found them promising.. since AMD.. understood finally! that DP.. has to go UP UP UP..
EDIT:
My command lines (due my conditions.. this were the best 5 hours.. specs/attributes..):
290X
clpts_x86-64.exe -o 6 -u XXX:XXX -t 0,0 -a 1
270X
clpts_x86-64.exe -o 6 -u XXX:XXX -t 1 -a 1
-
I've installed Catalyst 14, downloaded the correct version of clpts for catalyst 14 and I'm now averaging over 5000 c/m.
So a huge improvement compared to using Catalyst13, almost doubling what I got with 1.1 before, thanks.
-
I've installed Catalyst 14, downloaded the correct version of clpts for catalyst 14 and I'm now averaging over 5000 c/m.
So a huge improvement compared to using Catalyst13, almost doubling what I got with 1.1 before, thanks.
told you matey!!! =) nice to have you on board... lets go ON.. I am not a average coder.. but I can read code..
like a wizard! let me say.. but.. time.. is a TOO much precious.. thing to me.. and... unfortunately.. i dont't have all the time.. I would like to have it though...
learn.. is my advice.. never reject learning... because that's the BEST THING IN THE OUR LIFES!
Sorry.. too much celebrating... =) It's obvious.. I am too happy .. but because of other affairs..
Anyways... keep going... Just let me give you this feedback.. Crypto.. will BE.. HUGE!
-
Hy,can somebody tell me how can I start mining NRS on Ypool with GPU 280X 3GB,pls.
-
v1.2 with catalyst 13 is getting my HD7970's 4370 col/min for NRS and PTS. It's up over 33% with this update. I was averaging 2960 col/min before. Good job! And thank you.
-
Catalyst 14 with the proper clpts-v1.2 for that driver on linux is averaging 5100 or possibly slightly more per 280X. I've setup a few gpu's now to try and help keep the network churning along.
-
Great work. Win is still slower than linux but i am getting ~4800 c/m now with my 290x and Catalyst 14.
-
Great work. Win is still slower than linux but i am getting ~4800 c/m now with my 290x and Catalyst 14.
yep...
After changing "-a 1" to "-a 0"...
290X (2 thread) - 4817 col/m (from 4679)...
-
Great work. Win is still slower than linux but i am getting ~4800 c/m now with my 290x and Catalyst 14.
yep...
After changing "-a 1" to "-a 0"...
290X (2 thread) - 4817 col/m (from 4679)...
??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???
Thanks. "-a 1" was the fastest option for me so far but i tried "-a 0" again and i am getting ~5200 now.
-
??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???
Thanks. "-a 1" was the fastest option for me so far but i tried "-a 0" again and i am getting ~5200 now.
Yeah, I thought it was strange that you weren't getting a higher average then me. AMD linux drivers are not faster than the windows counterparts and I'm not overclocking my 280X, so it had to be something else.
-
Damn
AMD update 14.4 with nans v1.2 update, I get with a 280x Toxic 5200 c/m, bfeore 3600 c/m
You are a great Man.
-
NaN, do NVIDIA/AMD cards... profit from DMA access for multicard miner implementation?.. will have tons of memory for memory allocation. plus.. threads can be NUMA so... is it possible to design NRS/PTS algos with advantage on this?
SHA is more unlike i know.. but scrypt might have it's advantages...
EDIT: can you share with me a profiled data of your miner running over a 290/290X card? or do you want me to do run it?.. I would like to see if there is place for implementing something like this.. if you are interested.. give me a ping.
-
Damn
AMD update 14.4 with nans v1.2 update, I get with a 280x Toxic 5200 c/m, bfeore 3600 c/m
You are a great Man.
which option of-a?
how many sh / m?
I test also the 14.4 driver to date. I found out, that is the option in my R290x-t 1.1-a 1 on my Win7x64 and a monitor on the device. are best
-
Damn
AMD update 14.4 with nans v1.2 update, I get with a 280x Toxic 5200 c/m, bfeore 3600 c/m
You are a great Man.
which option of-a?
how many sh / m?
I test also the 14.4 driver to date. I found out, that is the option in my R290x-t 1.1-a 1 on my Win7x64 and a monitor on the device. are best
you have 4 optional codes to use with the miner.. using -a flag... you have 0, 1, 2 or 3...
Usually 0 is for 290/290X and 1 for others... but it depends a bit on the OS/Board/CPU... your setup in general..
-
I know how much sh / m do you get?
-
I know how much sh / m do you get?
fixed..
I get around 9.406 sh/m (4768 col/m) over the 290X.. but I would say.. this is not the usual value.. you should get above 5200 col/m... I have something preventing.. my card to pump... (acknowledged).
EDIT: Forgot I am EU... I use , for decimal... :S LOL
-
[MASTER] @ 12:23:14 | work received | sharetarget 0x0080000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000000000
[WORKER1] share found: 20754872 <-> 18110106 #892 (433718) @ 1399026195
[WORKER1] share found: 39356499 <-> 24461962 #893 (433966) @ 1399026198
12:23:23 | 4636 c/m | 9.536 sh/m | VL: 884 (98.99%) | RJ: 9 (1.01%) | S
0%) | ART: 4.076e+008 ms (22.43/9.899/15.55)
[WORKER0] share found: 4842003 <-> 10828914 #894 (434396) @ 1399026204
12:23:33[WORKER | 1] share found: 29758071 <-> 12186142 #895 (435240) @
154641
c/m | 9.54 sh/m | VL: 885 (98.99%) | RJ: 9 (1.01%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | A
e+008 ms (22.43/9.899/15.55)
[WORKER1] share found: 4620972 <-> 45861533 #896 (435504) @ 1399026218
[MASTER] @ 12:23:42 | work received | sharetarget 0x0080000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000000000
12:23:43 | 4636 c/m | 9.534 sh/m | VL: 887 (99.00%) | RJ: 9 (1.00%) | S
0%) | ART: 4.076e+008 ms (22.43/9.899/15.55)
I get the same
-
[MASTER] @ 12:23:14 | work received | sharetarget 0x0080000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000000000
[WORKER1] share found: 20754872 <-> 18110106 #892 (433718) @ 1399026195
[WORKER1] share found: 39356499 <-> 24461962 #893 (433966) @ 1399026198
12:23:23 | 4636 c/m | 9.536 sh/m | VL: 884 (98.99%) | RJ: 9 (1.01%) | S
0%) | ART: 4.076e+008 ms (22.43/9.899/15.55)
[WORKER0] share found: 4842003 <-> 10828914 #894 (434396) @ 1399026204
12:23:33[WORKER | 1] share found: 29758071 <-> 12186142 #895 (435240) @
154641
c/m | 9.54 sh/m | VL: 885 (98.99%) | RJ: 9 (1.01%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | A
e+008 ms (22.43/9.899/15.55)
[WORKER1] share found: 4620972 <-> 45861533 #896 (435504) @ 1399026218
[MASTER] @ 12:23:42 | work received | sharetarget 0x0080000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000000000
12:23:43 | 4636 c/m | 9.534 sh/m | VL: 887 (99.00%) | RJ: 9 (1.00%) | S
0%) | ART: 4.076e+008 ms (22.43/9.899/15.55)
I get the same
your board+CPU+RAM(and clocks)... plus gpu clocks...
It normally does not have to do with this.. you might have found the same problem I have... let's check.
-
so now I have time :)
I have
CPU Typ QuadCore AMD Phenom X4 Black Edition 9950, 2600 MHz (13 x 200)
CPU Takt 2611.9 MHz (Original: 2600 MHz)
Motherboard Name Asus M2N32-SLI Deluxe (2 PCI, 1 PCI-E x1, 1 PCI-E x4, 2 PCI-E x16, 4 DDR2 DIMM, Audio, Dual Gigabit LAN, IEEE-1394)
Motherboard Chipsatz nVIDIA nForce 590 SLI, AMD K10
Arbeitsspeicher 4096 MB (DDR2-800 DDR2 SDRAM)
Speicherbus 535.8 MHz x2 1066 MHz ungagged mode
Command Rate (CR) 2T
HyperTransport Takt 1004.6 MHz
North Bridge Takt 2009.3 MHz
Grafikkarte Asus R9290X-DC2OC-4GD5
GPU Codename Hawaii XT (PCI Express 3.0 x16 1002 / 67B0, Rev 00)
GPU Takt 1050 MHz (original: 1050 MHz)
Speichertakt 1350 MHz (original: 1350 MHz)
-
so now I have time :)
I have
CPU Typ QuadCore AMD Phenom X4 Black Edition 9950, 2600 MHz (13 x 200)
CPU Takt 2611.9 MHz (Original: 2600 MHz)
Motherboard Name Asus M2N32-SLI Deluxe (2 PCI, 1 PCI-E x1, 1 PCI-E x4, 2 PCI-E x16, 4 DDR2 DIMM, Audio, Dual Gigabit LAN, IEEE-1394)
Motherboard Chipsatz nVIDIA nForce 590 SLI, AMD K10
Arbeitsspeicher 4096 MB (DDR2-800 DDR2 SDRAM)
Speicherbus 535.8 MHz x2 1066 MHz ungagged mode
Command Rate (CR) 2T
HyperTransport Takt 1004.6 MHz
North Bridge Takt 2009.3 MHz
Grafikkarte Asus R9290X-DC2OC-4GD5
GPU Codename Hawaii XT (PCI Express 3.0 x16 1002 / 67B0, Rev 00)
GPU Takt 1050 MHz (original: 1050 MHz)
Speichertakt 1350 MHz (original: 1350 MHz)
While among many things I might think that could impact mining for algos that do not depend on CPU memory. I am still thinking that my explanation to why some have ~5200 and we have about ~4700 with a 290X cards.... is PCIe tech...
PCIe 3.0 has better encoding than PCIe 2.. thus.. costs less cpu cycles.. and makes GPU data to offload better CPU command instructions. I can't prove this right now.. but as I already did some experiments.. over boards that had PCIe 3.. I remember my results.. and they where.. easy better.. for SHA it might not make much difference.. but for scrypt and alike algos.. it makes.
Remember.. it's not the throughput that matter in crypto.. its the latency and command efficiency per Hz or pipeline cycle.
I also have PCIe 2.0.. does anyone has PCIe 2.0 and 5200 col/s with a 290X to prove me wrong.. =) Thanks
-
No, there should be no pci-e bandwidth limitations because only a few bytes and the program code is transferred over pci-e. The quoted performance was for a factory overclocked 280X, so subtract 10% to get a performance estimate for a reference card. I used Catalyst 13.12 because Catalyst 14.4 was slower. Could you post your command line options?
As NaN said, it is very unlikely pci-e bandwidth is the issue. Quite possible it may have something to do with gpu and memory clocks, the relation between those two seem to be very important. I'm averaging closer to 5100 than 5200 for each of my 280X cards, but have not messed with overclocking and such, mostly because I haven't found an easy way to do it on a headless linux system.
-
No, there should be no pci-e bandwidth limitations because only a few bytes and the program code is transferred over pci-e. The quoted performance was for a factory overclocked 280X, so subtract 10% to get a performance estimate for a reference card. I used Catalyst 13.12 because Catalyst 14.4 was slower. Could you post your command line options?
As NaN said, it is very unlikely pci-e bandwidth is the issue. Quite possible it may have something to do with gpu and memory clocks, the relation between those two seem to be very important. I'm averaging closer to 5100 than 5200 for each of my 280X cards, but have not messed with overclocking and such, mostly because I haven't found an easy way to do it on a headless linux system.
And I agree... not bandwith.... latency (EDIT: to be more precise.. it's not latency.. is efficiency in this case...)!.. PCIe 3 has less overhead than PCIe 2... that causes CPU to use more o less.. cpu cycles to command processes to do things over PCIe communication (in average).
The more GPUs you have for example.. the more PCIe overhead you will have. THis of course is very low... but my indication is that it causes some differences... My 290X already did >210% of what my 270X does (PCIe3.0)... now it does <200% (195% at the moment).. using the same miners and GPU clocks.. only CPU/board/ram was different. Shame I can't do testes right now.. with the new miner...
But.. a few more months.. and a new board.. and CPU will come =) let's be patient =)
-
I'm not seeing a very heavy cpu-load for clpts though, even though I'm not using pci-3 for every card. Oh I've tried the "-a 1" option again and that does seem to be a lot faster than -a 0, but it also takes longer to get up to speed and fluctuates more.
It looks like I'm now averaging very close to 5200 c/m, with my 280Xs, with some up and down swings.
-
I'm not seeing a very heavy cpu-load for clpts though, even though I'm not using pci-3 for every card. Oh I've tried the "-a 1" option again and that does seem to be a lot faster than -a 0, but it also takes longer to get up to speed and fluctuates more.
It looks like I'm now averaging very close to 5200 c/m, with my 280Xs, with some up and down swings.
yes.. I found the same about -a 1 and -a 0... but still 0 is faster for 290X
But regarding cpu-load... you will not see it.. that's not how it works.. just because you don't have cpu load.. does not mean.. an application is not being the most efficient.. possible.. it's all about other things... like code.. and what tech are you using about hardware... number nowdays.. just serve to sell hardware.. you need more.. to understand how you get to a result.. actually.. you need just one thing.. math... =)
-
so now I have time :)
I have
CPU Typ QuadCore AMD Phenom X4 Black Edition 9950, 2600 MHz (13 x 200)
CPU Takt 2611.9 MHz (Original: 2600 MHz)
Motherboard Name Asus M2N32-SLI Deluxe (2 PCI, 1 PCI-E x1, 1 PCI-E x4, 2 PCI-E x16, 4 DDR2 DIMM, Audio, Dual Gigabit LAN, IEEE-1394)
Motherboard Chipsatz nVIDIA nForce 590 SLI, AMD K10
Arbeitsspeicher 4096 MB (DDR2-800 DDR2 SDRAM)
Speicherbus 535.8 MHz x2 1066 MHz ungagged mode
Command Rate (CR) 2T
HyperTransport Takt 1004.6 MHz
North Bridge Takt 2009.3 MHz
Grafikkarte Asus R9290X-DC2OC-4GD5
GPU Codename Hawaii XT (PCI Express 3.0 x16 1002 / 67B0, Rev 00)
GPU Takt 1050 MHz (original: 1050 MHz)
Speichertakt 1350 MHz (original: 1350 MHz)
While among many things I might think that could impact mining for algos that do not depend on CPU memory. I am still thinking that my explanation to why some have ~5200 and we have about ~4700 with a 290X cards.... is PCIe tech...
PCIe 3.0 has better encoding than PCIe 2.. thus.. costs less cpu cycles.. and makes GPU data to offload better CPU command instructions. I can't prove this right now.. but as I already did some experiments.. over boards that had PCIe 3.. I remember my results.. and they where.. easy better.. for SHA it might not make much difference.. but for scrypt and alike algos.. it makes.
Remember.. it's not the throughput that matter in crypto.. its the latency and command efficiency per Hz or pipeline cycle.
I also have PCIe 2.0.. does anyone has PCIe 2.0 and 5200 col/s with a 290X to prove me wrong.. =) Thanks
Hello, may be you are right, however, I do not think so.
My 2x280x cards is working on mode x1 v1.1. with 30cm extenders ( to pcie x16, second to pcie x1) with old mainboard.
Making ~9980 -:- 10060 c/m, i.e. ~4990-:-5030 c/m on each card.
I'm not saying that there is no logic in what you're saying, but in practice it doesn't matter, important operations are performed inside the video cards.
Rather may affect the rejected/discard percent of work.
However I don't have a chance to check it, don't have a new hardware ;)
-
so now I have time :)
I have
CPU Typ QuadCore AMD Phenom X4 Black Edition 9950, 2600 MHz (13 x 200)
CPU Takt 2611.9 MHz (Original: 2600 MHz)
Motherboard Name Asus M2N32-SLI Deluxe (2 PCI, 1 PCI-E x1, 1 PCI-E x4, 2 PCI-E x16, 4 DDR2 DIMM, Audio, Dual Gigabit LAN, IEEE-1394)
Motherboard Chipsatz nVIDIA nForce 590 SLI, AMD K10
Arbeitsspeicher 4096 MB (DDR2-800 DDR2 SDRAM)
Speicherbus 535.8 MHz x2 1066 MHz ungagged mode
Command Rate (CR) 2T
HyperTransport Takt 1004.6 MHz
North Bridge Takt 2009.3 MHz
Grafikkarte Asus R9290X-DC2OC-4GD5
GPU Codename Hawaii XT (PCI Express 3.0 x16 1002 / 67B0, Rev 00)
GPU Takt 1050 MHz (original: 1050 MHz)
Speichertakt 1350 MHz (original: 1350 MHz)
While among many things I might think that could impact mining for algos that do not depend on CPU memory. I am still thinking that my explanation to why some have ~5200 and we have about ~4700 with a 290X cards.... is PCIe tech...
PCIe 3.0 has better encoding than PCIe 2.. thus.. costs less cpu cycles.. and makes GPU data to offload better CPU command instructions. I can't prove this right now.. but as I already did some experiments.. over boards that had PCIe 3.. I remember my results.. and they where.. easy better.. for SHA it might not make much difference.. but for scrypt and alike algos.. it makes.
Remember.. it's not the throughput that matter in crypto.. its the latency and command efficiency per Hz or pipeline cycle.
I also have PCIe 2.0.. does anyone has PCIe 2.0 and 5200 col/s with a 290X to prove me wrong.. =) Thanks
Hello, may be you are right, however, I do not think so.
My 2x280x cards is working on mode x1 v1.1. with 30cm extenders ( to pcie x16, second to pcie x1) with old mainboard.
Making ~9980 -:- 10060 c/m, i.e. ~4990-:-5030 c/m on each card.
I'm not saying that there is no logic in what you're saying, but in practice it doesn't matter, important operations are performed inside the video cards.
Rather may affect the rejected/discard percent of work.
However I don't have a chance to check it, don't have a new hardware ;)
Only the 290/290X get affected... 280X and bellow... do not.. that's my experience. But again.. I am not sure.. too.. Just .. saying.. Once I have my hands over 2 new boards.. this will get sorted..
what chipset you got over that board? I am also considering that PCIe could be splitting (switching) in my case... I have to check.. and therefore creating more "waitting time"...
-
so now I have time :)
I have
CPU Typ QuadCore AMD Phenom X4 Black Edition 9950, 2600 MHz (13 x 200)
CPU Takt 2611.9 MHz (Original: 2600 MHz)
Motherboard Name Asus M2N32-SLI Deluxe (2 PCI, 1 PCI-E x1, 1 PCI-E x4, 2 PCI-E x16, 4 DDR2 DIMM, Audio, Dual Gigabit LAN, IEEE-1394)
Motherboard Chipsatz nVIDIA nForce 590 SLI, AMD K10
Arbeitsspeicher 4096 MB (DDR2-800 DDR2 SDRAM)
Speicherbus 535.8 MHz x2 1066 MHz ungagged mode
Command Rate (CR) 2T
HyperTransport Takt 1004.6 MHz
North Bridge Takt 2009.3 MHz
Grafikkarte Asus R9290X-DC2OC-4GD5
GPU Codename Hawaii XT (PCI Express 3.0 x16 1002 / 67B0, Rev 00)
GPU Takt 1050 MHz (original: 1050 MHz)
Speichertakt 1350 MHz (original: 1350 MHz)
While among many things I might think that could impact mining for algos that do not depend on CPU memory. I am still thinking that my explanation to why some have ~5200 and we have about ~4700 with a 290X cards.... is PCIe tech...
PCIe 3.0 has better encoding than PCIe 2.. thus.. costs less cpu cycles.. and makes GPU data to offload better CPU command instructions. I can't prove this right now.. but as I already did some experiments.. over boards that had PCIe 3.. I remember my results.. and they where.. easy better.. for SHA it might not make much difference.. but for scrypt and alike algos.. it makes.
Remember.. it's not the throughput that matter in crypto.. its the latency and command efficiency per Hz or pipeline cycle.
I also have PCIe 2.0.. does anyone has PCIe 2.0 and 5200 col/s with a 290X to prove me wrong.. =) Thanks
Hello, may be you are right, however, I do not think so.
My 2x280x cards is working on mode x1 v1.1. with 30cm extenders ( to pcie x16, second to pcie x1) with old mainboard.
Making ~9980 -:- 10060 c/m, i.e. ~4990-:-5030 c/m on each card.
I'm not saying that there is no logic in what you're saying, but in practice it doesn't matter, important operations are performed inside the video cards.
Rather may affect the rejected/discard percent of work.
However I don't have a chance to check it, don't have a new hardware ;)
Only the 290/290X get affected... 280X and bellow... do not.. that's my experience. But again.. I am not sure.. too.. Just .. saying.. Once I have my hands over 2 new boards.. this will get sorted..
what chipset you got over that board? I am also considering that PCIe could be splitting (switching) in my case... I have to check.. and therefore creating more "waitting time"...
As I said before, an old motherboard ECS G31, s775, DDR2 4g E6600 :)
-
so now I have time :)
I have
CPU Typ QuadCore AMD Phenom X4 Black Edition 9950, 2600 MHz (13 x 200)
CPU Takt 2611.9 MHz (Original: 2600 MHz)
Motherboard Name Asus M2N32-SLI Deluxe (2 PCI, 1 PCI-E x1, 1 PCI-E x4, 2 PCI-E x16, 4 DDR2 DIMM, Audio, Dual Gigabit LAN, IEEE-1394)
Motherboard Chipsatz nVIDIA nForce 590 SLI, AMD K10
Arbeitsspeicher 4096 MB (DDR2-800 DDR2 SDRAM)
Speicherbus 535.8 MHz x2 1066 MHz ungagged mode
Command Rate (CR) 2T
HyperTransport Takt 1004.6 MHz
North Bridge Takt 2009.3 MHz
Grafikkarte Asus R9290X-DC2OC-4GD5
GPU Codename Hawaii XT (PCI Express 3.0 x16 1002 / 67B0, Rev 00)
GPU Takt 1050 MHz (original: 1050 MHz)
Speichertakt 1350 MHz (original: 1350 MHz)
While among many things I might think that could impact mining for algos that do not depend on CPU memory. I am still thinking that my explanation to why some have ~5200 and we have about ~4700 with a 290X cards.... is PCIe tech...
PCIe 3.0 has better encoding than PCIe 2.. thus.. costs less cpu cycles.. and makes GPU data to offload better CPU command instructions. I can't prove this right now.. but as I already did some experiments.. over boards that had PCIe 3.. I remember my results.. and they where.. easy better.. for SHA it might not make much difference.. but for scrypt and alike algos.. it makes.
Remember.. it's not the throughput that matter in crypto.. its the latency and command efficiency per Hz or pipeline cycle.
I also have PCIe 2.0.. does anyone has PCIe 2.0 and 5200 col/s with a 290X to prove me wrong.. =) Thanks
Hello, may be you are right, however, I do not think so.
My 2x280x cards is working on mode x1 v1.1. with 30cm extenders ( to pcie x16, second to pcie x1) with old mainboard.
Making ~9980 -:- 10060 c/m, i.e. ~4990-:-5030 c/m on each card.
I'm not saying that there is no logic in what you're saying, but in practice it doesn't matter, important operations are performed inside the video cards.
Rather may affect the rejected/discard percent of work.
However I don't have a chance to check it, don't have a new hardware ;)
Only the 290/290X get affected... 280X and bellow... do not.. that's my experience. But again.. I am not sure.. too.. Just .. saying.. Once I have my hands over 2 new boards.. this will get sorted..
what chipset you got over that board? I am also considering that PCIe could be splitting (switching) in my case... I have to check.. and therefore creating more "waitting time"...
As I said before, an old motherboard ECS G31, s775, DDR2 4g E6600 :)
I know I am being.. a bit annoying.. but if you get the chance.. can you run 2 instances.. separate.. and report the speeds..? =) although you have 280Xs... I would like to see if there is difference over the two PCIe you are using.. over that board.. when and if you get a chance of course.. and.. by the way.. thanks in advance.. =)
-
if it is on the pci bus, then we must increase but only from 100 to 110 Mhz and get 10% more performance
-
so now I have time :)
I have
CPU Typ QuadCore AMD Phenom X4 Black Edition 9950, 2600 MHz (13 x 200)
CPU Takt 2611.9 MHz (Original: 2600 MHz)
Motherboard Name Asus M2N32-SLI Deluxe (2 PCI, 1 PCI-E x1, 1 PCI-E x4, 2 PCI-E x16, 4 DDR2 DIMM, Audio, Dual Gigabit LAN, IEEE-1394)
Motherboard Chipsatz nVIDIA nForce 590 SLI, AMD K10
Arbeitsspeicher 4096 MB (DDR2-800 DDR2 SDRAM)
Speicherbus 535.8 MHz x2 1066 MHz ungagged mode
Command Rate (CR) 2T
HyperTransport Takt 1004.6 MHz
North Bridge Takt 2009.3 MHz
Grafikkarte Asus R9290X-DC2OC-4GD5
GPU Codename Hawaii XT (PCI Express 3.0 x16 1002 / 67B0, Rev 00)
GPU Takt 1050 MHz (original: 1050 MHz)
Speichertakt 1350 MHz (original: 1350 MHz)
While among many things I might think that could impact mining for algos that do not depend on CPU memory. I am still thinking that my explanation to why some have ~5200 and we have about ~4700 with a 290X cards.... is PCIe tech...
PCIe 3.0 has better encoding than PCIe 2.. thus.. costs less cpu cycles.. and makes GPU data to offload better CPU command instructions. I can't prove this right now.. but as I already did some experiments.. over boards that had PCIe 3.. I remember my results.. and they where.. easy better.. for SHA it might not make much difference.. but for scrypt and alike algos.. it makes.
Remember.. it's not the throughput that matter in crypto.. its the latency and command efficiency per Hz or pipeline cycle.
I also have PCIe 2.0.. does anyone has PCIe 2.0 and 5200 col/s with a 290X to prove me wrong.. =) Thanks
Hello, may be you are right, however, I do not think so.
My 2x280x cards is working on mode x1 v1.1. with 30cm extenders ( to pcie x16, second to pcie x1) with old mainboard.
Making ~9980 -:- 10060 c/m, i.e. ~4990-:-5030 c/m on each card.
I'm not saying that there is no logic in what you're saying, but in practice it doesn't matter, important operations are performed inside the video cards.
Rather may affect the rejected/discard percent of work.
However I don't have a chance to check it, don't have a new hardware ;)
Only the 290/290X get affected... 280X and bellow... do not.. that's my experience. But again.. I am not sure.. too.. Just .. saying.. Once I have my hands over 2 new boards.. this will get sorted..
what chipset you got over that board? I am also considering that PCIe could be splitting (switching) in my case... I have to check.. and therefore creating more "waitting time"...
As I said before, an old motherboard ECS G31, s775, DDR2 4g E6600 :)
you works with linux?
I tested very long then the option-a3. and I'm surprised this is very stable and just as fast as option-a1. Maybe something even faster. exactly I can not say unfortunately.
because the diff has changed dramatically. I tested now again the-a1 option. for c / m is almost always identical only sh / m changed. I hope the diff is now equal times.
-
I know I am being.. a bit annoying.. but if you get the chance.. can you run 2 instances.. separate.. and report the speeds..? =) although you have 280Xs... I would like to see if there is difference over the two PCIe you are using.. over that board.. when and if you get a chance of course.. and.. by the way.. thanks in advance.. =)
@Ykw
From some hours I am running on coin that I don't want to break the miner :)
However this experiment I've done in the past, no big difference on running separate process (one instances to each device).
I remember that I got a little worst collision summary than one instance on all devices (-t 0,0,1,1.....e.t.c.).
if it is on the pci bus, then we must increase but only from 100 to 110 Mhz and get 10% more performance
@Mario241077
You are right, overclocking the CPU/Bus, gives little advantage...
Also if you like experiments, try to give more high process priority, and see the results ;)
I am at the moment on Windows Server 2012, the miner for this coin that mining now, no source code or build for Linux :-(
Anyway, I didn't run clpts miner under Linux, I had some issues with the libraries there...
Don't believe there is a big difference Linux VS Windows, my experience with other miners indicates that...
No remember where, I saw that "-a 1" option is for optimizing 280x, "-a 2" is for 290x, but may be wrong....
-
as NAN said UPDATE 15: Catalyst 13.12 and v1.2 I get with the 280x TOXIC @1150MHz ca.5530 C/M -t 0,0 -a 0
THanks your great
-
I know I am being.. a bit annoying.. but if you get the chance.. can you run 2 instances.. separate.. and report the speeds..? =) although you have 280Xs... I would like to see if there is difference over the two PCIe you are using.. over that board.. when and if you get a chance of course.. and.. by the way.. thanks in advance.. =)
@Ykw
From some hours I am running on coin that I don't want to break the miner :)
However this experiment I've done in the past, no big difference on running separate process (one instances to each device).
I remember that I got a little worst collision summary than one instance on all devices (-t 0,0,1,1.....e.t.c.).
if it is on the pci bus, then we must increase but only from 100 to 110 Mhz and get 10% more performance
When.. you have time... and patience..
What I would like to see is which card gets the lower performance... =) the one that uses the PCIe from the CPU directly or the one from the ICH7 (in your case).
-
@Ykw
I did the experiment for you :)
So, on screenshot you can see the vga1 that is connected on pcie 16x first cmd window, on second cmd window is vga2 on pcie 1x.
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3YMX5z3l5htQ21UbGgtZzZ3Vlk/edit?pli=1
There is, however, one catch ;)
The vga1 is sapphire 280x dual oc elpida memomry
Vga2 is Asus 280x direct cu 2 Hynix memory ;)
I think that Asus is better vga ;)
Anyway, in principle, there is no difference from that of which slot the card is attached.
-
@Ykw
I did the experiment for you :)
So, on screenshot you can see the vga1 that is connected on pcie 16x first cmd window, on second cmd window is vga2 on pcie 1x.
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B3YMX5z3l5htQ21UbGgtZzZ3Vlk/edit?pli=1
There is, however, one catch ;)
The vga1 is sapphire 280x dual oc elpida memomry
Vga2 is Asus 280x direct cu 2 Hynix memory ;)
I think that Asus is better vga ;)
Anyway, in principle, there is no difference from that of which slot the card is attached.
Very nice... thanks for the time...
There is only one chance to know for sure.. switch cards..
My 290X does not change much with memory... frequency.. but timming would be a different matter... so.. i can give some credit for what you say.. but still... not sure if the huge difference is only card... assuming you have all frequencies the same..
-
Hi .
is anybody know if there will be an optimized version for radeon 290 and 290x , please ?
Thanking you in advance for your answer .
-
As I mentioned many times, the "slowness" of R9 290(X) seems to be caused by the driver. Every kernel executes much faster than on a R9 280X, but the card (or the driver) is not able to overlap the execution of the kernels like it is the case with the 280X. On Windows the 3 kernels are completely processed sequentially, so the Linux version is faster because at least one kernel is able to overlap with another kernel. Perhaps a different set of kernels which only need less than 1GB memory will circumvent this behaviour, but I can't give any guarantees because the R9 290(X) has different ACEs than the 280X, too.
-
As I mentioned many times, the "slowness" of R9 290(X) seems to be caused by the driver. Every kernel executes much faster than on a R9 280X, but the card (or the driver) is not able to overlap the execution of the kernels like it is the case with the 280X. On Windows the 3 kernels are completely processed sequentially, so the Linux version is faster because at least one kernel is able to overlap with another kernel. Perhaps a different set of kernels which only need less than 1GB memory will circumvent this behaviour, but I can't give any guarantees because the R9 290(X) has different ACEs than the 280X, too.
Has Mantle the ability to get higher performance? Can it be compiled for this? Or does it need to be "ported" to this SDK?
-
Mantle is an API for the graphics pipeline and we are doing compute workloads. Besides, the best API does not help if the driver is slow.
-
Thanks for the answer.
Anyway , i hope that a solution will be found because 290x is the future of AMD graphic cards .
Perhaps with the next driver ?!
-
Why different memory usage and floating gpu load? (94-98%) 2 7870 card.
(http://gpuz.techpowerup.com/14/05/20/b69.png) (http://gpuz.techpowerup.com/14/05/20/4r8.png)
4295cpm its good? 8sh/min
-
The 14.6 is faster than 14.4 for me. 10400 cpm vs 9300 cpm,dual 290x,1000/1250
I didn't test 13.12 though
-
The 14.6 is faster than 14.4 for me. 10400 cpm vs 9300 cpm,dual 290x,1000/1250
I didn't test 13.12 though
windows or linux?
-
could some one help me out why i get this error when i load up 6 gpu
5 gpu work great but 6th always crash
https://www.dropbox.com/s/2ennp3d6nmetiov/Photo%20Jun%2002%2C%208%2000%2034%20PM.jpg
-
could some one help me out why i get this error when i load up 6 gpu
5 gpu work great but 6th always crash
https://www.dropbox.com/s/2ennp3d6nmetiov/Photo%20Jun%2002%2C%208%2000%2034%20PM.jpg
with other miner, on other alt coin, is working well?
-
could some one help me out why i get this error when i load up 6 gpu
5 gpu work great but 6th always crash
https://www.dropbox.com/s/2ennp3d6nmetiov/Photo%20Jun%2002%2C%208%2000%2034%20PM.jpg
That seems to be a driver error because the memory addresses are negative. But I'm wondering why the addresses are 32bit long. Do you use a 64bit Windows (I guess 8.1) and which Catalyst driver do you use?
-
could some one help me out why i get this error when i load up 6 gpu
5 gpu work great but 6th always crash
https://www.dropbox.com/s/2ennp3d6nmetiov/Photo%20Jun%2002%2C%208%2000%2034%20PM.jpg
That seems to be a driver error because the memory addresses are negative. But I'm wondering why the addresses are 32bit long. Do you use a 64bit Windows (I guess 8.1) and which Catalyst driver do you use?
@NaN,
Obviously with 5 card modification works, at least that is written in the previous billyboy402 post :)
So, this is driver error, you can’t use more than 5 card on one mainboard, driver not support this.
(try to find in forum modified ati driver (edited inf file) that support 6 cards)
That is my previous question: in is this configuration with six card, works with other miners with other coin mining?
-
The 14.6 is faster than 14.4 for me. 10400 cpm vs 9300 cpm,dual 290x,1000/1250
I didn't test 13.12 though
windows or linux?
windows
-
I tested Catalyst 14.6 on Linux
R9 280X@1100/1500MHz: >5600 cpm with -a 0
R9 290@stock: ~5250 cpm with -a 1
This looks promising but the Windows driver for R9 290(X) still seems to be slower than the Linux driver.
-
win 7 64x driver 14.6
I use the monitor at the R 290X
I use the command line
setx GPU_FORCE_64BIT_PTR 1
setx GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PRECENT 100
these I have taken from the mines bfgminer description for Scrypt
-t 0,0 -a 0 HD 7970 4041=c/m - 7.86=sh/m - GPU 1000 Mhz - Memory 1375 MHZ - ART=55.2 - Share value/h on ypool.net=456.65 - stable trend after shares total 1483
-t 1,1 -a 0 R 290X 5117=c/m - 10.25=sh/m - GPU 1050 Mhz - Memory 1350 MHZ - ART=2.832e+008 - Share value/h on ypool.net=594.06 - stable trend after shares total 3961 - 22:02:42 | 5117 c/m | 10.25 sh/m | VL: 3961 (98.85%) | RJ: 39 (0.97%) | ST: 7 (0.17%) | ART: 2.832e+008 ms (40.46/27.2/18.85)
-t 0,0 -a 1 HD 7970 4357=c/m - 8.64=sh/m - GPU 1000 Mhz - Memory 1375 MHZ - ART=51.17 - Share value/h on ypool.net=500.62 - stable trend after shares total 3633 - 21:51:21 | 4358 c/m | 8.664 sh/m | VL: 3633 (98.75%) | RJ: 42 (1.14%) | ST: 4 (.11%) | ART: 51.17 ms (56.87/21.57/23.26)
-t 1,1 -a 1 R 290X 5534=c/m - 10.98=sh/m - GPU 1050 Mhz - Memory 1350 MHZ - ART=2.496+008 - Share value/h on ypool.net=635.32 - stable trend after shares total 2597
-t 0,0 -a 2 HD 7970 4008=c/m - 7.78=sh/m - GPU 1000 Mhz - Memory 1375 MHZ - ART=55.92 - Share value/h on ypool.net=449.63 - stable trend after shares total 2286 - 02:51:32 | 4008 c/m | 7.79 sh/m | VL: 2265 (98.65%) | RJ: 29 (1.26%) | ST: 2 (0.09%) | ART: 55.93 ms (53.55/24.97/32.83)
-t 1,1 -a 2 R 290X 5067=c/m - 9.51=sh/m - GPU 1050 Mhz - Memory 1350 MHZ - ART=1.213e+008 - Share value/h on ypool.net=547.37 - stable trend after shares total 1965 - 07:55:00 | 5067 c/m | 9.477 sh/m | VL: 3461 (98.63%) | RJ: 47 (1.34%) | ST: 1 (0.03%) | ART: 1.213e+008 ms (70.35/44.51/37.01)
-t 0,0 -a 3 HD 7970 4400=c/m - 8.43=sh/m - GPU 1000 Mhz - Memory 1375 MHZ - ART=50.5 - Share value/h on ypool.net=491,37 - stable trend after shares total 5730 - 22:49:05 | 4409 c/m | 8.514 sh/m | VL: 5730 (98.76%) | RJ: 68 (1.17%) | ST: 4 (0.07%) | ART: 50.91 ms (56.71/21.36/23.28)
-t 1,1 -a 3 R 290X 5359=c/m - 10.39=sh/m - GPU 1050 Mhz - Memory 1350 MHZ - ART=1.64e+008 - Share value/h on ypool.net=602.42 - stable trend after shares total 3062 - 03:00:47 | 5359 c/m | 10.39 sh/m | VL: 3031 (99.15%) | RJ: 26 (0.85%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 1.64e+008 ms (40.99/22.25/19.62)
without command line
setx GPU_FORCE_64BIT_PTR 1
setx GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PRECENT 100
-t 0,0 -a 0 HD 7970 =c/m - =sh/m - GPU 1000 Mhz - Memory 1375 MHZ - ART= - Share value/h on ypool.net= - stable trend after shares total
-t 1,1 -a 0 R 290X =c/m - =sh/m - GPU 1050 Mhz - Memory 1350 MHZ - ART= - Share value/h on ypool.net= - stable trend after shares total -
-t 0,0 -a 1 HD 7970 4364=c/m - 8.60=sh/m - GPU 1000 Mhz - Memory 1375 MHZ - ART=51.1 - Share value/h on ypool.net=497.28 - stable trend after shares total 2734 - 08:15:29 | 4364 c/m | 8.588 sh/m | VL: 2702 (98.97%) | RJ: 26 (0.95%) | ST: 2 (0.07%) | ART: 51.1 ms (78.27/29.7/32)
-t 1,1 -a 1 R 290X 5539=c/m - 10.75=sh/m - GPU 1050 Mhz - Memory 1350 MHZ - ART=2.414+008 - Share value/h on ypool.net=621.96 - stable trend after shares total 2706 - 08:43:29 | 5540 c/m | 10.76 sh/m | VL: 3597 (98.82%) | RJ: 43 (1.18%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 2.414e+008 ms (53.96/28.07/21.75)
-t 0,0 -a 2 HD 7970 =c/m - =sh/m - GPU 1000 Mhz - Memory 1375 MHZ - ART= - Share value/h on ypool.net=
-t 1,1 -a 2 R 290X =c/m - =sh/m - GPU 1050 Mhz - Memory 1350 MHZ - ART= - Share value/h on ypool.net=
-t 0,0 -a 3 HD 7970 4406=c/m - 8.70=sh/m - GPU 1000 Mhz - Memory 1375 MHZ - ART=50.92 - Share value/h on ypool.net=504.61 - stable trend after shares total 7612 - 23:09:24 | 4406 c/m | 8.704 sh/m | VL: 7813 (99.00%) | RJ: 74 (0.94%) | ST: 5 (0.06%) | ART: 50.92 ms (56.66/21.34/23.27)
-t 1,1 -a 3 R 290X =c/m - =sh/m - GPU 1050 Mhz - Memory 1350 MHZ - ART= - Share value/h on ypool.net=
This ART value is important for NAN
the lower is better
you need min 1200 shares for an optimal result, more is better for correct average value on. you reach only after a very long time and many shares. let it run
-
Some tests with Catalyst 14.6 on Windows 7 x86_64 (at least >30 minutes to stabilize or +1200 shares - Done.. aborted. I had to change hardware due to local temperature... test env is different now..):
@Mario241077 Thanks for the nice number =)
[with -a 0]:
- R9 270X@1120/1400MHz: ~2230 col/m & ~4.7 sh/m
- R9 290X@1050/1350MHz: ~5500 col/m & ~10.60-11.16 sh/m - 618-647 Share/h @ypool (1h54m)
14:44:56 | 5491 c/m | 10.68 sh/m | VL: 1206 (99.26%) | RJ: 9 (0.74%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 40.58 ms
(37.49/25.15/18.18) EDIT: Interesting result for the 290X (this actually matches my initial runs, where -a 0 was faster for me.. when I had 3k col/m with the 290X)
[with -a 1]:
- R9 270X@1120/1400MHz: ~2540 col/m & ~4.56-4.73 sh/m - 259-275 Share/h @ypool (4h47m)
17:39:03 | 2551 c/m | 4.719 sh/m | VL: 1344 (98.90%) | RJ: 15 (1.10%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 4.937e+
008 ms (44.37/21.82/21.4) - R9 290X@1050/1350MHz: ~5420 col/m & ~9.63-10.94 sh/m - 567-632 Share/h @ypool (1h57m)
18:51:56 | 5418 c/m | 10.94 sh/m | VL: 1280 (99.15%) | RJ: 11 (0.85%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 40.89 m
s (40.1/25.16/16.15)
[with -a 2]:
- R9 270X@1120/1400MHz: ~2215 col/m & ~4.14-4.37 sh/m - 243-252 Share/h @ypool (4h40m)
22:20:31 | 2218 c/m | 4.369 sh/m | VL: 1209 (98.77%) | RJ: 15 (1.23%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 6.37e+0
08 ms (45.8/28.78/26.64) - R9 290X@1050/1350MHz: ~5385 col/m & ~10.07-10.35 sh/m - 577-594 Share/h @ypool (2h03m)
16:51:19 | 5362 c/m | 10.34 sh/m | VL: 1259 (98.05%) | RJ: 23 (1.79%) | ST: 2 (0.16%) | ART: 41.82 m
s (37.55/25.29/20.45)
[with -a 3]:
- R9 270X@1120/1400MHz: ~2580 col/m & ~5.55-5.67 sh/m - 322-327 Share/h @ypool
- R9 290X@1050/1350MHz: ~5470 col/m & ~10.50-11.24 sh/m - 626-649 Share/h @ypool (2h14m)
21:08:51 | 5474 c/m | 11.17 sh/m | VL: 1493 (98.68%) | RJ: 19 (1.26%) | ST: 1 (0.07%) | ART: 41 ms (
38.22/23.96/19.35) EDIT: I think Mario241077 is right here.. it takes a lot more time to stabilize.. but at the end.. the result is better, in average I would say (still testing with GPU usage for main adapter).
NOTE: Just noticed that I need no more to switch displays to activate the GPUs without screen connected. =) I am not sure if it was with this new beta. Very handy. This might have been introduced with the Mantle version.
Disclaimer: My results might differ a bit in max/min ration because I am also using CPU to other purposes.. but leaving at least 50% of the logical cores free. I will try to set the max I see and the min.. after stabilization. The results include using the 290X for the display adapter.
-
you need about 1200 shares for an optimal result
Yes.. for -a 3 specially... for the -a 1 and 0 it was somehow quicker to stabilize or the result approaches faster to the stable one (more than 4h running.. with max/min values)..
-
I can confirm a very big boost in performance from the 14.6 Catalyst on ubuntu linux, last I checked I was getting over 5900 c/m for each 280X with -a 0, it still hasn't stabilized yet, while I was averaging around 5200 c/m with the 14.4 catalyst version.
-
What is the ART over the miner?
How is it measured...
-
For the ones that use the GPU for multiple purposes... (and only for 290/X models) i found out that using "-a 3" it's actually a more performer mode for mining... but also more prioritizing for the same realm. Giving you little usage for other multipurpose activities: games, video accelerated streaming... and everything that uses about less than 50% of your the GPU.
I found that the best option for multipurpose/mining is "-a 0".... as I have been using till now without problems. The observation taken is simple:
"The mining is running over the background.. and when I start watching a film with GPU acceleration, it crackles a bit until it adapts to the new workload.. then it settles just right for it.." - using for example "splash PRO EX".
Using "-a 3" you will experience a millisecond lag.. periodically... let's say.. less than half second period, where your eye experience a freeze over the frame.
Is this true for newer versions of CPU/BOARDS/RAM etc?... I have a X58 with XEON 4Cores and 1600 DDR3.
Disclaimer... This is a result of several software and hardware experiences.. ones more noticeable than others... but.. they all conclude that the most adaptable choice is the one I mention (-a 0).
-
Just found something very appealing for users of 290/X.... and above...
Summer is coming and I am waiting for my AC upgrade... in order to run overclocked GPUs and CPUs.. without burning at home.. so.. super experiments.. come to place.. where you try to lower the temps at all cost!
I have set the 290X (via AMD driver).. to -50% power.. and -47.x% GPU clock... and xarammmmm the results! AMAZIMG!!!
This is... brutal efficiency! Temps when from 72 ºC -> 60 ºC (on die with over 28ºC temps ambient)!! The current AMPs went even further!.. 82 -> 60 ºC!!! Power consumption varies.. as the card is constantly changing clocks... but.. in average.. is a lot less.. I would say.. 40% less power consumption.. So.. guys..! more viability to 290/X GPUs than with the older ones.. the 270X can't do the same...
But I would like to ear from your results... mines are like this:
13:37:17 | 4256 c/m | 8.366 sh/m | VL: 5742 (98.98%) | RJ: 56 (0.97%) | ST: 3 (0.05%) | ART: 52.5 ms
(47.62/37.61/23.32)
-
Just found something very appealing for users of 290/X.... and above...
Summer is coming and I am waiting for my AC upgrade... in order to run overclocked GPUs and CPUs.. without burning at home.. so.. super experiments.. come to place.. where you try to lower the temps at all cost!
I have set the 290X (via AMD driver).. to -50% power.. and -47.x% GPU clock... and xarammmmm the results! AMAZIMG!!!
This is... brutal efficiency! Temps when from 72 ºC -> 60 ºC (on die with over 28ºC temps ambient)!! The current AMPs went even further!.. 82 -> 60 ºC!!! Power consumption varies.. as the card is constantly changing clocks... but.. in average.. is a lot less.. I would say.. 40% less power consumption.. So.. guys..! more viability to 290/X GPUs than with the older ones.. the 270X can't do the same...
But I would like to ear from your results... mines are like this:
13:37:17 | 4256 c/m | 8.366 sh/m | VL: 5742 (98.98%) | RJ: 56 (0.97%) | ST: 3 (0.05%) | ART: 52.5 ms
(47.62/37.61/23.32)
These results you're getting are similar to mine, but when I want to lower temperature I just use one thread.
-
POW of NRS has ended .
Is it possible to obtain a number of Pool to mine PTS instead on YPOOL , please ?
Thanks in advance.
-
I only know of beeeeer.org as pts mining pool
-
POW of NRS has ended .
Is it possible to obtain a number of Pool to mine PTS instead on YPOOL , please ?
Thanks in advance.
EDIT
Automatic mining from NRS is now over PTS over YPOOL
-
What is the performance of the miner with 14.6 catalyst on win7 64bit for 280x and 7950?
-
I tested Catalyst 14.6RC2 on Windows 7 64bit:
R9 280X@1100/1500 MHz: 5700+ cpm with -a 0 (and -t 0,0)
-
I tested Catalyst 14.6RC2 on Windows 7 64bit:
R9 280X@1100/1500 MHz: 5700+ cpm with -a 0
Same card and settings and I get 4.2 with a -0 and 4.6 with a - 3.
Am I missing something?
-
Same card and settings and I get 4.2 with a -0 and 4.6 with a - 3.
Am I missing something?
Do you use two threads per GPU (i.e. -t 0,0)? Does the GPU throttle and do you run Catalyst 13.12 or the newest Catalyst 14.6 (which is faster than Catalyst 13.12)?
-
Same card and settings and I get 4.2 with a -0 and 4.6 with a - 3.
Am I missing something?
Do you use two threads per GPU (i.e. -t 0,0)? Does the GPU throttle and do you run Catalyst 13.12 or the newest Catalyst 14.6 (which is faster than Catalyst 13.12)?
14.6 cata like you, didn't use 2 threads so that was the reason for low cpm. Thanks a lot !
-
I tested Catalyst 14.7beta on Windows 7 64bit:
R9 280X@1100/1500 MHz: ~6000 cpm (with two threads per GPU and -a 0)
-
R9 280x Sapphire Dual-X 1020/1375 w/o clock = 5100 cpm with 14.7 Catalyst on win7 64bit
-
Why i rig with 4x280X run at 11350cpm,
The detail of my bat file is :clpts_x86-64 -o http://ypool.net -u xxx -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0
Because i see all people can run 5000cpm/280x , who can help me to edit my bat file
Thanks
-
Why i rig with 4x280X run at 11350cpm,
The detail of my bat file is :clpts_x86-64 -o http://ypool.net -u xxx -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0
Because i see all people can run 5000cpm/280x , who can help me to edit my bat file
Thanks
You are using an outdated version of clpts. Please download v1.2. It has a different command line syntax than older versions and you have to change your bat file to clpts_x86-64 -o 6 -u xxx:x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0, if you want to use ypool.net
-
Why i rig with 4x280X run at 11350cpm,
The detail of my bat file is :clpts_x86-64 -o http://ypool.net -u xxx -p x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0
Because i see all people can run 5000cpm/280x , who can help me to edit my bat file
Thanks
You are using an outdated version of clpts. Please download v1.2. It has a different command line syntax than older versions and you have to change your bat file to clpts_x86-64 -o 6 -u xxx:x -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0, if you want to use ypool.net
Many thanks for Mr Nan, it worked at 23000cpm/280x
-
Is it possible to allow api ports? I would love to use CGWatcher to monitor it with a simple api hook in
-
Why I can't download from here https://www.dropbox.com/sh/na6m711qbca35gy/faSXN2XHZX ?
Could anyone help me or send me a copy ?
thank you !
-
Why I can't download from here https://www.dropbox.com/sh/na6m711qbca35gy/faSXN2XHZX ?
Could anyone help me or send me a copy ?
thank you !
read here https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2183.0
-
one of my rids only four 280X ,and it can run with the command like this
clpts_x86-64 -o 6 -u xxx.xxx:xxx -t 0,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0
but when i change it to this
clpts_x86-64 -o 6 -u xxx.xxx:xxx -t 0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0 or
clpts_x86-64 -o 6 -u xxx.xxx:xxx -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0
the program will crash and quit .
why ?
-
Can I run 2 instances with 270x?
-
Can I run 2 instances with 270x?
Only if it has 4 GB GPU-RAM otherwise you are limited to a single thread/270x
-
one of my rids only four 280X ,and it can run with the command like this
clpts_x86-64 -o 6 -u xxx.xxx:xxx -t 0,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0
but when i change it to this
clpts_x86-64 -o 6 -u xxx.xxx:xxx -t 0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0 or
clpts_x86-64 -o 6 -u xxx.xxx:xxx -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0
the program will crash and quit .
why ?
me too. Pls advise.
-
one of my rids only four 280X ,and it can run with the command like this
clpts_x86-64 -o 6 -u xxx.xxx:xxx -t 0,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0
but when i change it to this
clpts_x86-64 -o 6 -u xxx.xxx:xxx -t 0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0 or
clpts_x86-64 -o 6 -u xxx.xxx:xxx -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0
the program will crash and quit .
why ?
me too. Pls advise.
I'm working on clpts-1.3, which should fix this issue. But as workaround one could use two instances of clpts, i.e. the first instance running on GPU 0 and 1, and the second on GPU 2 and 3.
-
one of my rids only four 280X ,and it can run with the command like this
clpts_x86-64 -o 6 -u xxx.xxx:xxx -t 0,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0
but when i change it to this
clpts_x86-64 -o 6 -u xxx.xxx:xxx -t 0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0 or
clpts_x86-64 -o 6 -u xxx.xxx:xxx -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 -a 0
the program will crash and quit .
why ?
me too. Pls advise.
I'm working on clpts-1.3, which should fix this issue. But as workaround one could use two instances of clpts, i.e. the first instance running on GPU 0 and 1, and the second on GPU 2 and 3.
good news and Thank a lot....
please fix the speed reduce and can not return its right hash after re-connecting pool. Because sometime my rigs lose connection to pool, and only get 1/2 speed after getting network again. I have to re-start your miner manually.
-
I released clpts-v1.3. It resolves some issues and supports GPUs with 1GB RAM (see https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2598.0 and read the README ;D)
-
I released clpts-v1.3. It resolves some issues and supports GPUs with 1GB RAM (see https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2598.0 and read the README ;D)
Good work man!
could you check a readme file file on -g parameter, clearly said i check the readme and don`t understand how to run(( i will use old one what have -t parameter
also it will be good to have an example.but in all archives.
also i would like to know what is current speed on amd 290? - my shows 4300
-
could you check a readme file file on -g parameter, clearly said i check the readme and don`t understand how to run(( i will use old one what have -t parameter
also it will be good to have an example.but in all archives.
also i would like to know what is current speed on amd 290? - my shows 4300
Performance numbers without details on OS, Catalyst version and configuration are pretty useless, but 4300 cpm is slow if the newest drivers are used and if the GPU does not run into thermal throttling. The Linux and Windows drivers have totally different characteristics.
I hope that I can explain the use of the -g parameter with some examples. It controls the number of threads which are run on each GPU. Let's assume that you used -t 0,0 previously. That means that you run 2 threads on the device with ID 0. Therefore the new syntax would be -d 0 -g 2. -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 is equivalent to -d 0-3 -g 2 and -t 0,0,0,1,2,3,3 would become -d 0-3 -g 3,1,1,2. Using the newest Catalyst version on Windows, I have observed that spawning 4 threads per R9 290 and -a 2 gives a significant performance boost (-g 4 -a 2). Please note that the -d parameter is optional. If it is not specified than all AMD GPUs are used by clpts. You can still use the -t parameter but people with many GPUs per rig reported problems and something like -t 0,0,0,0,1,1,1,1 instead of -d 0,1 -g 4 is not convenient.
-
could you check a readme file file on -g parameter, clearly said i check the readme and don`t understand how to run(( i will use old one what have -t parameter
also it will be good to have an example.but in all archives.
also i would like to know what is current speed on amd 290? - my shows 4300
Performance numbers without details on OS, Catalyst version and configuration are pretty useless, but 4300 cpm is slow if the newest drivers are used and if the GPU does not run into thermal throttling. The Linux and Windows drivers have totally different characteristics.
I hope that I can explain the use of the -g parameter with some examples. It controls the number of threads which are run on each GPU. Let's assume that you used -t 0,0 previously. That means that you run 2 threads on the device with ID 0. Therefore the new syntax would be -d 0 -g 2. -t 0,0,1,1,2,2,3,3 is equivalent to -d 0-3 -g 2 and -t 0,0,0,1,2,3,3 would become -d 0-3 -g 3,1,1,2. Using the newest Catalyst version on Windows, I have observed that spawning 4 threads per R9 290 and -a 2 gives a significant performance boost (-g 4 -a 2). Please note that the -d parameter is optional. If it is not specified than all AMD GPUs are used by clpts. You can still use the -t parameter but people with many GPUs per rig reported problems and something like -t 0,0,0,0,1,1,1,1 instead of -d 0,1 -g 4 is not convenient.
Ok so if i have 3 gpu in the rig my option will be so
-d 0-3 -a 2 -g 4,4,4
i have win 7 64 catalist 14.6 8 gb ram
with new parameters i write upper i have 5000 cpm om card(stock 947/1250 elpida)
and what cpm did you get?
-
NAN ich weiß du sprichst deutsch, das ist einfacher für mich so schreibe ich deutsch. :)
ich lasse immer zwei batch laufen, einen für jede Karte.
Win7 x64
H7970 3 GB und R 290x 4GB
treiber 14.7
-g 4 stürzt ab bei einer R 290x!!
-g 3 läüft, aber so wie es aussieht ist -g 2 schneller
HD 7970 3GB mit der alten version -t0,0
4350 c/m / 8,564 sh/m / ART 51,2 /
yppool zeigte vorher ca. 500 shares / stunde
nun ca. 522
Ergebnisse -g3
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 2284127 <-> 14963528 #918 @ 1411165047
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 30058830 <-> 5663418 #919 @ 1411165048
00:18:18 | 4716 c/m | 8.894 sh/m | VL: 917 (99.78%) | RJ: 2 (0.22%) | ST: 0
0%) | ART: 47.03 ms (44.74/24.98/21.41)
00:18:28 | 4716 c/m | 8.879 sh/m | VL: 917 (99.78%) | RJ: 2 (0.22%) | ST: 0
0%) | ART: 47.03 ms (44.74/24.98/21.41)
00:18:38 | 4716 c/m | 8.865 sh/m | VL: 917 (99.78%) | RJ: 2 (0.22%) | ST: 0
0%) | ART: 47.03 ms (44.74/24.98/21.41)
[GPU0/Thread2] share found: 51415395 <-> 40500035 #920 @ 1411165076
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 21058343 <-> 43889098 #921 @ 1411165082
[GPU0/Thread2] share found: 11605731 <-> 50505555 #922 @ 1411165083
00:18:48 | 4717 c/m | 8.88 sh/m | VL: 920 (99.78%) | RJ: 2 (0.22%) | ST: 0 (
%) | ART: 47.03 ms (44.74/24.97/21.41)
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 17539646 <-> 55611560 #923 @ 1411165089
send ping packet
00:18:58 | 4717 c/m | 8.875 sh/m | VL: 921 (99.78%) | RJ: 2 (0.22%) | ST: 0
0%) | ART: 47.03 ms (44.74/24.98/21.41)
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 44354191 <-> 9329666 #924 @ 1411165096
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 58174318 <-> 44015244 #925 @ 1411165097
[GPU0/Thread2] share found: 66223955 <-> 31739290 #926 @ 1411165104
00:19:08 | 4717 c/m | 8.89 sh/m | VL: 924 (99.78%) | RJ: 2 (0.22%) | ST: 0 (
%) | ART: 47.03 ms (44.74/24.98/21.41)
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 65486473 <-> 2447636 #927 @ 1411165112
00:19:18 | 4718 c/m | 8.885 sh/m | VL: 925 (99.78%) | RJ: 2 (0.22%) | ST: 0
0%) | ART: 47.03 ms (44.74/24.98/21.41)
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 42670682 <-> 62509294 #928 @ 1411165117
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 10020834 <-> 10115164 #929 @ 1411165117
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 45642596 <-> 44915055 #930 @ 1411165118
00:19:28 | 4718 c/m | 8.9 sh/m | VL: 928 (99.78%) | RJ: 2 (0.22%) | ST: 0 (0
) | ART: 47.03 ms (44.74/24.98/21.41)
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 30110412 <-> 29433354 #931 @ 1411165128
00:19:38 | 4718 c/m | 8.895 sh/m | VL: 929 (99.79%) | RJ: 2 (0.21%) | ST: 0
0%) | ART: 47.03 ms (44.74/24.98/21.41)
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 52093246 <-> 53132696 #932 @ 1411165138
00:19:48 | 4718 c/m | 8.89 sh/m | VL: 930 (99.79%) | RJ: 2 (0.21%) | ST: 0 (
%) | ART: 47.03 ms (44.74/24.98/21.41)
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 29051204 <-> 55585588 #933 @ 1411165148
00:19:58 | 4718 c/m | 8.886 sh/m | VL: 931 (99.79%) | RJ: 2 (0.21%) | ST: 0
0%) | ART: 47.03 ms (44.74/24.98/21.41)
00:20:08 | 4717 c/m | 8.872 sh/m | VL: 931 (99.79%) | RJ: 2 (0.21%) | ST: 0
0%) | ART: 47.03 ms (44.74/24.98/21.41)
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 17490448 <-> 11509503 #934 @ 1411165167
[GPU00:20:180 | /Thread0] share found: 16630813 <-> 55488641 #935 @ 14111651
4718 c/m | 8.877 sh/m | VL: 932 (99.79%) | RJ: 2 (0.21%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | A
47.03 ms (44.74/24.98/21.41)
R290x mit der alten version hatte ich
5589 c/m 11,05 sh/m Art 2.521
yppool zeigte vorher ca. 600 shares / stunde
nun ca. 678 / stunde
ergebnisse mit -g 3
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 47350342 <-> 54716961 #1357 @ 1411165870
00:31:56 | 5867 c/m | 11.68 sh/m | VL: 1353 (99.71%) | RJ: 3 (0.22%) | ST: 1 (0.
07%) | ART: 37.88 ms (63.06/22.44/21.15)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 37633997 <-> 38772229 #1358 @ 1411165879
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 33079132 <-> 39052190 #1359 @ 1411165881
00:32:06 | 5867 c/m | 11.68 sh/m | VL: 1355 (99.71%) | RJ: 3 (0.22%) | ST: 1 (0.
07%) | ART: 37.88 ms (63.07/22.44/21.15)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 38296340 <-> 39783599 #1360 @ 1411165883
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 54342157 <-> 58019450 #1361 @ 1411165892
00:32:16 | 5867 c/m | 11.68 sh/m | VL: 1357 (99.71%) | RJ: 3 (0.22%) | ST: 1 (0.
07%) | ART: 37.88 ms (63.07/22.44/21.15)
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 16180389 <-> 50648994 #1362 @ 1411165894
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 53514827 <-> 12537258 #1363 @ 1411165895
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 25912719 <-> 18342235 #1364 @ 1411165897
00:32:26 | 5867 c/m | 11.69 sh/m | VL: 1360 (99.71%) | RJ: 3 (0.22%) | ST: 1 (0.
07%) | ART: 37.88 ms (63.07/22.45/21.15)
00:32:36 | 5868 c/m | 11.67 sh/m | VL: 1360 (99.71%) | RJ: 3 (0.22%) | ST: 1 (0.
07%) | ART: 37.88 ms (63.07/22.45/21.15)
00:32:46 | 5867 c/m | 11.66 sh/m | VL: 1360 (99.71%) | RJ: 3 (0.22%) | ST: 1 (0.
07%) | ART: 37.88 ms (63.07/22.45/21.15)
[MASTER] @ 00:32:53 | work received | sharetarget 0x0080000000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000000000
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 48461203 <-> 60229453 #1365 @ 1411165930
00:32:56 | 5867 c/m | 11.65 sh/m | VL: 1361 (99.71%) | RJ: 3 (0.22%) | ST: 1 (0.
07%) | ART: 37.88 ms (63.07/22.45/21.15)
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 43918689 <-> 5168596 #1366 @ 1411165934
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 21464259 <-> 62929611 #1367 @ 1411165935
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 51255971 <-> 63707757 #1368 @ 1411165938
00:33:06 | 5867 c/m | 11.66 sh/m | VL: 1364 (99.71%) | RJ: 3 (0.22%) | ST: 1 (0.
07%) | ART: 37.88 ms (63.07/22.45/21.15)
00:33:16[GPU | 1/Thread2] share found: 51385740 <-> 44688375 #1369 @ 1411165957
5867 c/m | 11.65 sh/m | VL: 1364 (99.71%) | RJ: 3 (0.22%) | ST: 1 (0.07%) | ART:
37.88 ms (63.07/22.45/21.15)
00:33:26 | 5866 c/m | 11.63 sh/m | VL: 1365 (99.71%) | RJ: 3 (0.22%) | ST: 1 (0.
07%) | ART: 37.87 ms (63.07/22.44/21.15)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 35875722 <-> 46427441 #1370 @ 1411165965
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 36958298 <-> 44126773 #1371 @ 1411165967
00:33:36 | 5866 c/m | 11.64 sh/m | VL: 1367 (99.71%) | RJ: 3 (0.22%) | ST: 1 (0.
07%) | ART: 37.88 ms (63.07/22.44/21.15)
[GPU00:1/Thread33:1] share found: 53276509 <-> 64746840 #137246 @ 1411165977
| 5[GPU866 c/m | 111/Thread.63 sh/m | VL: 1367 (299.71%) | RJ: 3 (] share found
: 0.22902699%) | ST: 1 ( <-> 0.07%) | ART: 6693561037.88 ms ( #63.07/1373 @ 1411
165982
22.44/21.15)
[GPU00:33:561 | /Thread5867 c/m | 011] share found: .63 sh/m | VL: 1369 (5382453
399.71%) | RJ: 3 ( <-> 0.22%) | ST: 1 (7807353 #0.07%) | ART: 137437.88 ms ( @ 6
3.07/141116598922.44/
21.15)
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 63027313 <-> 45957041 #1375 @ 1411165991
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 40007249 <-> 60386592 #1376 @ 1411165996
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 45936684 <-> 34645361 #1377 @ 1411165998
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 64138626 <-> 8913741 #1378 @ 1411165999
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 26832486 <-> 24601351 #1379 @ 1411166002
00:34:06 | 5867 c/m | 11.65 sh/m | VL: 1375 (99.71%) | RJ: 3 (0.22%) | ST: 1 (0.
07%) | ART: 37.88 ms (63.07/22.44/21.15)
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 11313394 <-> 45412018 #1380 @ 1411166005
00:34:16 | 5867 c/m | 11.65 sh/m | VL: 1376 (99.71%) | RJ: 3 (0.22%) | ST: 1 (0.
nun teste ich -g 2
-
@Mario241077: Thanks for sharing your performance numbers. Does the R9 290X crash if you use -g 4 -a 2? -a 0 and -a 1 use more than 1GB RAM per thread and will therefore crash with -g 4. -a 2 and -a 3 use ~900MB RAM per thread. P.S. You may combine the two instances by using -d 0-1 -g 2,4 -a 0,2 so that the 7970 runs with -g 2 -a 0 and the 290x with -g 4 -a 2. You will get separate stats for each card and you can compare the ART value (less is better) to find your optimal config because it has less variance than the cpm value and the share rate.
-
When I run 1.3 version, I got this error :
GPU-deviceIDs: 0
gpu_threads: 1
algorithm: 0
[MASTER] | Spawning 1 worker threads
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Frontend phase failed compilation.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
Any idea how to fix this?
-
When I run 1.3 version, I got this error :
GPU-deviceIDs: 0
gpu_threads: 1
algorithm: 0
[MASTER] | Spawning 1 worker threads
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Frontend phase failed compilation.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
Any idea how to fix this?
you must to use -a 2 your algo -a 0
-
@Mario241077: Thanks for sharing your performance numbers. Does the R9 290X crash if you use -g 4 -a 2? -a 0 and -a 1 use more than 1GB RAM per thread and will therefore crash with -g 4. -a 2 and -a 3 use ~900MB RAM per thread. P.S. You may combine the two instances by using -d 0-1 -g 2,4 -a 0,2 so that the 7970 runs with -g 2 -a 0 and the 290x with -g 4 -a 2. You will get separate stats for each card and you can compare the ART value (less is better) to find your optimal config because it has less variance than the cpm value and the share rate.
yes if i use -a 2, on this card is my on this card is my screen
following happens! the memory of my PC loads up, the CPU goes to full load and the screen freezes! After a while I can move the mouse and the batch close.
PS: two separate batchs per card is faster
I'll still post the results
-
When I run 1.3 version, I got this error :
[...]
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Frontend phase failed compilation.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
Any idea how to fix this?
Your using the wrong binary. Most likely you have an older Catalyst 13.x driver installed. Download the *_Catalyst13 binary for your OS. If your driver is too old the miner will crash (Catalyst 13.12 and 13.11beta should work), but I recommend Catalyst 14.6 or newer because it's faster.
-
@Mario241077: Thanks for sharing your performance numbers. Does the R9 290X crash if you use -g 4 -a 2? -a 0 and -a 1 use more than 1GB RAM per thread and will therefore crash with -g 4. -a 2 and -a 3 use ~900MB RAM per thread. P.S. You may combine the two instances by using -d 0-1 -g 2,4 -a 0,2 so that the 7970 runs with -g 2 -a 0 and the 290x with -g 4 -a 2. You will get separate stats for each card and you can compare the ART value (less is better) to find your optimal config because it has less variance than the cpm value and the share rate.
yes if i use -a 2, on this card is my on this card is my screen
following happens! the memory of my PC loads up, the CPU goes to full load and the screen freezes! After a while I can move the mouse and the batch close.
PS: two separate batchs per card is faster
I'll still post the results
Ok, I only tested my R9 290 without an attached screen.
-
i think thats the problem... but so is my HD 7970 much faster
ypool had dropouts so I can post the results later ...
but two batch is faster, one per card..
-
Win7 x64
H7970 3 GB und R 290x 4GB
treiber 14.7
HD 7970 3GB mit der alten version -t 0,0
4350 c/m / 8,564 sh/m / ART 51,2 /
yppool zeigte vorher ca. 500 shares / stunde
nun ca. 522 mit -g 3
mit -g 2 nun 548.2344
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 34807593 <-> 31142041 #1583 @ 1411199619
09:54:27 | 4729 c/m | 9.348 sh/m | VL: 1583 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0
.00%) | ART: 46.99 ms (45.15/25.26/21.82)
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 6017830 <-> 20959402 #1584 @ 1411199628
09:54:37 | 4730 c/m | 9.345 sh/m | VL: 1584 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0
.00%) | ART: 46.99 ms (45.15/25.26/21.82)
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 46599595 <-> 19235475 #1585 @ 1411199637
[GPU09:54:470 | /Thread1] share found: 43668374730 c/m | <-> 31508192 #1586 @ 1
411199641
9.348 sh/m | VL: 1585 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 46.99 ms
(45.15/25.26/21.82)
09:54:57 | 4730 c/m | 9.339 sh/m | VL: 1586 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0
.00%) | ART: 46.98 ms (45.15/25.26/21.82)
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 28263039 <-> 59413920 #1587 @ 1411199663
09:55:07 | 4730 c/m | 9.335 sh/m | VL: 1587 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0
.00%) | ART: 46.98 ms (45.15/25.26/21.82)
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 33604240 <-> 32661113 #1588 @ 1411199668
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 50270733 <-> 31274101 #1589 @ 1411199669
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 52756443 <-> 38478603 #1590 @ 1411199670
09:55:17 | 4730 c/m | 9.344 sh/m | VL: 1590 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0
.00%) | ART: 46.98 ms (45.15/25.26/21.82)
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 22979443 <-> 57851025 #1591 @ 1411199684
09:55:27 | 4730 c/m | 9.341 sh/m | VL: 1591 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0
.00%) | ART: 46.98 ms (45.15/25.26/21.82)
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 55906226 <-> 46963632 #1592 @ 1411199685
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 11417531 <-> 19904417 #1593 @ 1411199687
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 20314749 <-> 47068814 #1594 @ 1411199688
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 53505502 <-> 58464656 #1595 @ 1411199689
09:55:37 | 4730 c/m | 9.355 sh/m | VL: 1595 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0
.00%) | ART: 46.98 ms (45.15/25.26/21.82)
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 43725428 <-> 63306583 #1596 @ 1411199695
R290x mit der alten version hatte ich
5589 c/m 11,05 sh/m Art 2.521
yppool zeigte vorher ca. 600 shares / stunde
nun ca. 678 / stunde mit -g 3
ergebnisse mit -g 2 jetzt 639.1185
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 33748386 <-> 35618717 #1877 @ 1411199825
09:57:48 | 5385 c/m | 10.88 sh/m | VL: 1876 (99.95%) | RJ: 1 (0.05%) | ST: 0 (0.
00%) | ART: 41.41 ms (38.88/10.77/18.57)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 17525394 <-> 52341323 #1878 @ 1411199829
09:57:58 | 5385 c/m | 10.88 sh/m | VL: 1877 (99.95%) | RJ: 1 (0.05%) | ST: 0 (0.
00%) | ART: 41.41 ms (38.88/10.77/18.57)
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 14617726 <-> 6890464 #1879 @ 1411199842
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 38661900 <-> 46006068 #1880 @ 1411199844
09:58:08 | 5385 c/m | 10.88 sh/m | VL: 1879 (99.95%) | RJ: 1 (0.05%) | ST: 0 (0.
00%) | ART: 41.41 ms (38.88/10.77/18.57)
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 26735365 <-> 63453004 #1881 @ 1411199849
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 28685236 <-> 21170837 #1882 @ 1411199851
09:58:18 | 5385 c/m | 10.88 sh/m | VL: 1881 (99.95%) | RJ: 1 (0.05%) | ST: 0 (0.
00%) | ART: 41.41 ms (38.88/10.77/18.57)
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 11390410 <-> 18951283 #1883 @ 1411199859
09:58:28 | 5384 c/m | 10.87 sh/m | VL: 1882 (99.95%) | RJ: 1 (0.05%) | ST: 0 (0.
00%) | ART: 41.41 ms (38.88/10.77/18.57)
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 33041294 <-> 29876442 #1884 @ 1411199874
09:58:38 | 5384 c/m | 10.87 sh/m | VL: 1883 (99.95%) | RJ: 1 (0.05%) | ST: 0 (0.
00%) | ART: 41.41 ms (38.88/10.77/18.57)
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 6091927 <-> 22152763 #1885 @ 1411199879
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 51299611 <-> 34588015 #1886 @ 1411199882
09:58:48 | 5385 c/m | 10.87 sh/m | VL: 1885 (99.95%) | RJ: 1 (0.05%) | ST: 0 (0.
00%) | ART: 41.41 ms (38.88/10.77/18.57)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 62788246 <-> 58871107 #1887 @ 1411199886
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 58930958 <-> 9415423 #1888 @ 1411199889
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 21044275 <-> 22968471 #1889 @ 1411199892
09:58:58 | 5385 c/m | 10.88 sh/m | VL: 1888 (99.95%) | RJ: 1 (0.05%) | ST: 0 (0.
00%) | ART: 41.41 ms (38.88/10.77/18.57)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 20855955 <-> 33852972 #1890 @ 1411199896
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 26750599 <-> 11753826 #1891 @ 1411199900
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 16493138 <-> 12788453 #1892 @ 1411199903
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 57684333 <-> 38928316 #1893 @ 1411199904
09:59:08 | 5385 c/m | 10.89 sh/m | VL: 1892 (99.95%) | RJ: 1 (0.05%) | ST: 0 (0.
00%) | ART: 41.41 ms (38.88/10.77/18.57)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 54121897 <-> 5503074 #1894 @ 1411199909
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 16572646 <-> 7851941 #1895 @ 1411199910
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 3538846 <-> 46062687 #1896 @ 1411199911
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 61913640 <-> 37487623 #1897 @ 1411199913
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 34541542 <-> 40372012 #1898 @ 1411199914
09:59:18 | 5386 c/m | 10.91 sh/m | VL: 1897 (99.95%) | RJ: 1 (0.05%) | ST: 0 (0.
00%) | ART: 41.41 ms (38.88/10.77/18.57)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 53687777 <-> 44766418 #1899 @ 1411199916
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 45625736 <-> 30403548 #1900 @ 1411199922
09:59:28 | 5385 c/m | 10.91 sh/m | VL: 1899 (99.95%) | RJ: 1 (0.05%) | ST: 0 (0.
00%) | ART: 41.41 ms (38.88/10.77/18.57)
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 16568695 <-> 61010732 #1901 @ 1411199926
Total share value/h (estimated): 1189.6395
-
after the close of all open applications like iexplorer I get my R290x to run with -g 4
them also runs stable if I open applications then
-
When I run 1.3 version, I got this error :
GPU-deviceIDs: 0
gpu_threads: 1
algorithm: 0
[MASTER] | Spawning 1 worker threads
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Frontend phase failed compilation.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
Any idea how to fix this?
you must to use -a 2 your algo -a 0
Still the same...
It start with verstion 1.2v2, 1.2 is working fine
GPU-deviceIDs: 0
gpu_threads: 1
algorithm: 2
[MASTER] | Spawning 1 worker threads
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Frontend phase failed compilation.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
-
Win7 x64
H7970 3 GB und R 290x 4GB
treiber 14.7
now one batch
device 0
HD 7970 3GB with the old version 1.2 -t 0,0
4350 c/m / 8,564 sh/m / ART 51,2 /
yppool shows before ca. 500 shares / hour
-g 3 522 sh/m
4718 c/m | 8.877 sh/m | VL: 932 (99.79%) | RJ: 2 (0.21%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | A 47.03 ms (44.74/24.98/21.41)
-g 2 548.2344 sh/m
4730 c/m | 9.355 sh/m | VL: 1595 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 46.98 ms (45.15/25.26/21.82)
now all in one batch -g 3 4833 c/m
device 1
R290x with the old version 1.2 -t 1,1
5589 c/m 11,05 sh/m Art 2.521
yppool shows before ca. 600 shares / hour
-g 3 678 sh/m
5866 c/m | 11.64 sh/m | VL: 1367 (99.71%) | RJ: 3 (0.22%) | ST: 1 (0.07%) | ART: 37.88 ms (63.07/22.44/21.15)
-g 2 639.1185 sh/m
5385 c/m | 10.91 sh/m | VL: 1899 (99.95%) | RJ: 1 (0.05%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 41.41 ms (38.88/10.77/18.57)
now all in one batch with -g 4 5862 c/m
total 10695 c/m , 20,65 sh/m , Total share value/h (estimated): 1209.6855
07:18:29 | 10695 c/m | 20.66 sh/m | VL: 9301 (99.96%) | RJ: 3 (0.03%) | ST: 1 (0
.01%) | ART: 41.54 ms (70.91/23.35/20.39)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 11950907 <-> 27756372 #3289 @ 1411276659
[GPU1/Thread3] share found: 30903418 <-> 33881996 #3290 @ 1411276661
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 26852328 <-> 5796437 #3291 @ 1411276664
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 63575139 <-> 11305360 #3292 @ 1411276668
GPU0: 4833 c/m | ART: 46.04 ms (44.51/25.5/21.58)
GPU1: 5862 c/m | ART: 37.83 ms (92.59/21.58/19.41)
07:18:39 | 10695 c/m | 20.67 sh/m | VL: 9305 (99.96%) | RJ: 3 (0.03%) | ST: 1 (0
.01%) | ART: 41.54 ms (70.91/23.35/20.39)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 17751832 <-> 586628 #3293 @ 1411276673
-
When I run 1.3 version, I got this error :
GPU-deviceIDs: 0
gpu_threads: 1
algorithm: 0
[MASTER] | Spawning 1 worker threads
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Frontend phase failed compilation.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
Any idea how to fix this?
you must to use -a 2 your algo -a 0
Still the same...
It start with verstion 1.2v2, 1.2 is working fine
GPU-deviceIDs: 0
gpu_threads: 1
algorithm: 2
[MASTER] | Spawning 1 worker threads
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Frontend phase failed compilation.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
do use driver 14.7?
-
When I run 1.3 version, I got this error :
GPU-deviceIDs: 0
gpu_threads: 1
algorithm: 0
[MASTER] | Spawning 1 worker threads
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Frontend phase failed compilation.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
Any idea how to fix this?
Still the same...
It start with verstion 1.2v2, 1.2 is working fine
GPU-deviceIDs: 0
gpu_threads: 1
algorithm: 2
[MASTER] | Spawning 1 worker threads
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Frontend phase failed compilation.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
You have overlooked my previous post:
Your using the wrong binary. Most likely you have an older Catalyst 13.x driver installed. Download the *_Catalyst13 binary for your OS. If your driver is too old the miner will crash (Catalyst 13.12 and 13.11beta should work), but I recommend Catalyst 14.6 or newer because it's faster.
-
When I run 1.3 version, I got this error :
GPU-deviceIDs: 0
gpu_threads: 1
algorithm: 0
[MASTER] | Spawning 1 worker threads
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Frontend phase failed compilation.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
Any idea how to fix this?
Still the same...
It start with verstion 1.2v2, 1.2 is working fine
GPU-deviceIDs: 0
gpu_threads: 1
algorithm: 2
[MASTER] | Spawning 1 worker threads
[WORKER0] Hello, World!
Error during compilation of program for device 'Tahiti':
Frontend phase failed compilation.
Error: Compilation from LLVMIR binary to IL text failed!
You have overlooked my previous post:
Your using the wrong binary. Most likely you have an older Catalyst 13.x driver installed. Download the *_Catalyst13 binary for your OS. If your driver is too old the miner will crash (Catalyst 13.12 and 13.11beta should work), but I recommend Catalyst 14.6 or newer because it's faster.
I am using "AMD-Catalyst-14.7-RC1-Windows-July9" driver, I think it's a beta driver.
EDIT: I install 14.7 RC3, and it worked, Thank you for the help.
-
Win7 x64
H7970 3 GB und R 290x 4GB
treiber 14.7 RC3
device 0
HD 7970 3GB with the old version 1.2 -t 0,0
4350 c/m / 8,564 sh/m / ART 51,2 /
yppool shows before ca. 500 shares / hour
-g 3 522 sh / hour
4718 c/m | 8.877 sh/m | VL: 932 (99.79%) | RJ: 2 (0.21%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | A 47.03 ms (44.74/24.98/21.41)
-g 2 548.2344 sh / hour
4730 c/m | 9.355 sh/m | VL: 1595 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 46.98 ms (45.15/25.26/21.82)
-g 3 4833 c/m one batch
GPU0: 4833 c/m | ART: 46.04 ms (44.51/25.5/21.58)
07:18:39 | 10695 c/m | 20.67 sh/m | VL: 9305 (99.96%) | RJ: 3 (0.03%) | ST: 1 (0.01%) | ART: 41.54 ms (70.91/23.35/20.39)
now one batch 4878 c/m -g 2
GPU0: 4878 c/m | ART: 45.61 ms (44.22/24.91/21.07)
10685 c/m | 21.07 sh/m | VL: 32183 (99.98%) | RJ: 5 (0.02%) | ST: 1 (0.00%) | ART: 41.63 ms (55.56/24.56/21.31)
device 1
R290x with the old version 1.2 -t 1,1
5589 c/m 11,05 sh/m Art 2.521
yppool shows before ca. 600 shares / hour
-g 3 678 sh / hour
5866 c/m | 11.64 sh/m | VL: 1367 (99.71%) | RJ: 3 (0.22%) | ST: 1 (0.07%) | ART: 37.88 ms (63.07/22.44/21.15)
-g 2 639.1185 sh / hour
5385 c/m | 10.91 sh/m | VL: 1899 (99.95%) | RJ: 1 (0.05%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 41.41 ms (38.88/10.77/18.57)
-g 4 5862 c/m one batch
GPU1: 5862 c/m | ART: 37.83 ms (92.59/21.58/19.41)
07:18:39 | 10695 c/m | 20.67 sh/m | VL: 9305 (99.96%) | RJ: 3 (0.03%) | ST: 1 (0.01%) | ART: 41.54 ms (70.91/23.35/20.39)
now one batch 5806 c/m -g 3
GPU1: 5806 c/m | ART: 38.28 ms (65.07/24.27/21.51)
10685 c/m | 21.07 sh/m | VL: 32183 (99.98%) | RJ: 5 (0.02%) | ST: 1 (0.00%) | ART: 41.63 ms (55.56/24.56/21.31)
total 10695 c/m , 20,65 sh/m , Total share value/h (estimated): 1209.6855 with -d 0-1 -g 3,4
now all in one batch total 10685 c/m | 21.07 sh/m Total share value/h (estimated): 1233.1989 with -d 0-1 -g 2,3
08:47:07 | 10684 c/m | 21.08 sh/m | VL: 32182 (99.98%) | RJ: 5 (0.02%) | ST: 1 (
0.00%) | ART: 41.63 ms (55.56/24.56/21.31)
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 7453395 <-> 3704969 #5274 @ 1411454826
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 52051796 <-> 8154187 #5275 @ 1411454835
GPU0: 4878 c/m | ART: 45.61 ms (44.22/24.91/21.07)
GPU1: 5806 c/m | ART: 38.28 ms (65.07/24.27/21.51)
08:47:17 | 10685 c/m | 21.07 sh/m | VL: 32183 (99.98%) | RJ: 5 (0.02%) | ST: 1 (
0.00%) | ART: 41.63 ms (55.56/24.56/21.31)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 11640703 <-> 25494001 #5276 @ 1411454835
-
Win7 x64
H7970 3 GB und R 290x 4GB
treiber 14.7 RC3
device 0
HD 7970 3GB with the old version 1.2 -t 0,0
4350 c/m / 8,564 sh/m / ART 51,2 /
yppool shows before ca. 500 shares / hour
-g 2 -a 2 548.2344 sh / hour
4730 c/m | 9.355 sh/m | VL: 1595 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 46.98 ms (45.15/25.26/21.82)
-g 3 -a 2 522 sh / hour
4718 c/m | 8.877 sh/m | VL: 932 (99.79%) | RJ: 2 (0.21%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | A 47.03 ms (44.74/24.98/21.41)
-g 2 -a 3 497.3065 sh / hour
4344 c/m | 8.502 sh/m | VL: 6971 (99.99%) | RJ: 1 (0.01%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 51.27 ms (51.92/18.42/16.83)
-g 3 -a 3 519.7473 sh / hour
4482 c/m | 8.897 sh/m | VL: 4993 (99.96%) | RJ: 2 (0.04%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 49.63 ms (58.14/21.81/17.92)
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 12649572 <-> 66771583 #2222 @ 1411800124
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 16456702 <-> 8080615 #2223 @ 1411800128
08:42:14 | 4482 c/m | 8.897 sh/m | VL: 4990 (99.96%) | RJ: 2 (0.04%) | ST: 0 (0.
00%) | ART: 49.63 ms (58.14/21.81/17.92)
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 10697367 <-> 9034239 #2224 @ 1411800133
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 14046374 <-> 28699462 #2225 @ 1411800137
08:42:24 | 4482 c/m | 8.899 sh/m | VL: 4992 (99.96%) | RJ: 2 (0.04%) | ST: 0 (0.
00%) | ART: 49.63 ms (58.14/21.81/17.92)
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 50987393 <-> 27381775 #2226 @ 1411800142
08:42:34 | 4482 c/m | 8.897 sh/m | VL: 4993 (99.96%) | RJ: 2 (0.04%) | ST: 0 (0.
00%) | ART: 49.63 ms (58.14/21.81/17.92)
device 1
R290x with the old version 1.2 -t 1,1
5589 c/m 11,05 sh/m Art 2.521
yppool shows before ca. 600 shares / hour
-g 2 -a 2 639.1185 sh / hour
5385 c/m | 10.91 sh/m | VL: 1899 (99.95%) | RJ: 1 (0.05%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 41.41 ms (38.88/10.77/18.57)
-g 3 -a 2 678 sh / hour
5866 c/m | 11.64 sh/m | VL: 1367 (99.71%) | RJ: 3 (0.22%) | ST: 1 (0.07%) | ART: 37.88 ms (63.07/22.44/21.15)
-g 3 -a 3 637.3290 sh/ hour
5504 c/m | 10.9 sh/m | VL: 8950 (99.97%) | RJ: 3 (0.03%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 40.4 ms (60.19/23.33/16.87)
-g 3 -a 4 622.7647 sh / hour
5435 c/m | 10.68 sh/m | VL: 6109 (99.98%) | RJ: 1 (0.02%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 40.88 ms (108.7/26.23/17.11)
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 925113 <-> 48513021 #2686 @ 1411800242
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 65855666 <-> 64593709 #2687 @ 1411800245
08:44:16 | 5435 c/m | 10.68 sh/m | VL: 6105 (99.98%) | RJ: 1 (0.02%) | ST: 0 (0.
00%) | ART: 40.88 ms (108.7/26.23/17.11)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 32612359 <-> 12768638 #2688 @ 1411800258
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 6378158 <-> 40890263 #2689 @ 1411800259
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 51334664 <-> 58350251 #2690 @ 1411800259
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 12641127 <-> 58749658 #2691 @ 1411800259
08:44:26 | 5435 c/m | 10.69 sh/m | VL: 6109 (99.98%) | RJ: 1 (0.02%) | ST: 0 (0.
00%) | ART: 40.88 ms (108.7/26.23/17.11)
08:44:36 | 5435 c/m | 10.68 sh/m | VL: 6109 (99.98%) | RJ: 1 (0.02%) | ST: 0 (0.
00%) | ART: 40.88 ms (108.7/26.23/17.11)
two batches
Total share value/h (estimated): 1.187,3529 -d 0 -g 2 -a 2 / -d 1 -g 2 -a 2
Total share value/h (estimated): 1226,2344 -d 0 -g 2 -a 2 / -d 1 -g 3 -a 2
Total share value/h (estimated): 1200.0000 -d 0 -g 3 -a 2 / -d 1 -g 3 -a 2
Total share value/h (estimated):
Total share value/h (estimated):
Total share value/h (estimated): 1134.0612 -d 0 -g 2 -a 3 / -d 1 -g 3 -a 3
Total share value/h (estimated):
Total share value/h (estimated): 1142.5120 -d 0 -g 3 -a 3 / -d 1 -g 4 -a 3
-d 0-1 -g 2,3 -a 2 one batch
GPU0: 4878 c/m | ART: 45.61 ms (44.22/24.91/21.07)
10685 c/m | 21.07 sh/m | VL: 32183 (99.98%) | RJ: 5 (0.02%) | ST: 1 (0.00%) | ART: 41.63 ms (55.56/24.56/21.31)[/b]
GPU1: 5806 c/m | ART: 38.28 ms (65.07/24.27/21.51)
10685 c/m | 21.07 sh/m | VL: 32183 (99.98%) | RJ: 5 (0.02%) | ST: 1 (0.00%) | ART: 41.63 ms (55.56/24.56/21.31)[/b]
one batch total 10685 c/m, | 21.07 sh/m, Total share value/h (estimated): 1233.1989 with -d 0-1 -g 2,3 -a 2
-d 0-1 -g 3,4 -a 2 one batch
GPU0: 4833 c/m | ART: 46.04 ms (44.51/25.5/21.58)
10695 c/m | 20.67 sh/m | VL: 9305 (99.96%) | RJ: 3 (0.03%) | ST: 1 (0.01%) | ART: 41.54 ms (70.91/23.35/20.39)
GPU1: 5862 c/m | ART: 37.83 ms (92.59/21.58/19.41)
10695 c/m | 20.67 sh/m | VL: 9305 (99.96%) | RJ: 3 (0.03%) | ST: 1 (0.01%) | ART: 41.54 ms (70.91/23.35/20.39)
one batch total 10695 c/m, 20,65 sh/m, Total share value/h (estimated): 1209.6855 with -d 0-1 -g 3,4 -a 2
-d 0-1 -g 3,3 -a 3 one batch
GPU0: 4489 c/m | ART: 49.56 ms (58.44/21.96/17.94)
10202 c/m | 19.74 sh/m | VL: 31632 (99.97%) | RJ: 5 (0.02%) | ST: 4 (0.01%) | ART: 43.59 ms (65.4/23.81/17.55)
GPU1: 5713 c/m | ART: 38.9 ms (70.86/25.25/17.24)
10202 c/m | 19.74 sh/m | VL: 31635 (99.97%) | RJ: 5 (0.02%) | ST: 4 (0.01%) | ART: 43.59 ms (65.4/23.81/17.55)
one batch total 10202 c/m, | 19.74 sh/m, Total share value/h (estimated): 1153.3231 with -d 0-1 -g 3,3 -a 3
-
Win7 x64
H7970 3 GB und R 290x 4GB
driver 14.9
device 0
HD 7970 3GB with the old version 1.2 -t 0,0
4350 c/m / 8,564 sh/m / ART 51,2 /
yppool shows before ca. 500 shares / hour
-g 2 -a 2
-g 3 -a 2
-g 2 -a 3
-g 3 -a 3
device 1
R290x with the old version 1.2 -t 1,1
5589 c/m 11,05 sh/m Art 2.521
yppool shows before ca. 600 shares / hour
-g 2 -a 2
-g 3 -a 2
-g 3 -a 3
-g 3 -a 4
two batches
Total share value/h (estimated): -d 0 -g 2 -a 2 / -d 1 -g 2 -a 2
Total share value/h (estimated): -d 0 -g 2 -a 2 / -d 1 -g 3 -a 2
Total share value/h (estimated): -d 0 -g 3 -a 2 / -d 1 -g 3 -a 2
Total share value/h (estimated):
Total share value/h (estimated):
Total share value/h (estimated): -d 0 -g 2 -a 3 / -d 1 -g 3 -a 3
Total share value/h (estimated):
Total share value/h (estimated): -d 0 -g 3 -a 3 / -d 1 -g 4 -a 3
-d 0-1 -g 2,3 -a 2
GPU0: 5392 c/m | ART: 41.3 ms (38.8/23.14/20.03)
GPU1: 6473 c/m | ART: 34.38 ms (55.34/21.58/21.06)
22:01:49 | 11865 c/m | 23.01 sh/m | VL: 14980 (99.95%) | RJ: 3 (0.02%) | ST: 5 (
0.03%) | ART: 37.53 ms (47.83/22.29/20.59)
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 762250 <-> 28420499 #14989 @ 1412107305
GPU0: 5392 c/m | ART: 41.3 ms (38.8/23.14/20.03)
GPU1: 6473 c/m | ART: 34.38 ms (55.34/21.58/21.06)
22:01:59 | 11865 c/m | 23 sh/m | VL: 14981 (99.95%) | RJ: 3 (0.02%) | ST: 5 (0.0
3%) | ART: 37.53 ms (47.83/22.29/20.59)
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 4530208 <-> 26855123 #14990 @ 1412107307
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 52595976 <-> 38655898 #14991 @ 1412107308
one batch total:
GPU0: 5392 c/m | ART: 41.3 ms (38.8/23.14/20.03)
GPU1: 6473 c/m | ART: 34.38 ms (55.34/21.58/21.06)
11865 c/m | 23 sh/m | VL: 14981 (99.95%) | RJ: 3 (0.02%) | ST: 5 (0.03%) | ART: 37.53 ms (47.83/22.29/20.59)
Total share value/h (estimated): 1345.7876 with -d 0-1 -g 2,3 -a 2
-d 0-1 -g 3,3 -a 2
GPU0: 5350 c/m | ART: 41.65 ms (38.81/23.29/20.42)
GPU1: 6058 c/m | ART: 36.8 ms (57.79/24.81/22.33)
22:19:23 | 11409 c/m | 22.29 sh/m | VL: 17370 (99.59%) | RJ: 42 (0.24%) | ST: 30
(0.17%) | ART: 39.07 ms (48.89/24.09/21.43)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 64228962 <-> 23798246 #17443 @ 1412194748
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 55359495 <-> 25672418 #17444 @ 1412194749
[GPU0/Thread2] share found: 62732236 <-> 66795173 #17445 @ 1412194755
GPU0: 5350 c/m | ART: 41.65 ms (38.81/23.29/20.42)
GPU1: 6058 c/m | ART: 36.8 ms (57.79/24.81/22.33)
22:19:33 | 11409 c/m | 22.28 sh/m | VL: 17373 (99.59%) | RJ: 42 (0.24%) | ST: 30
(0.17%) | ART: 39.07 ms (48.89/24.09/21.43)
[GPU0/Thread2] share found: 22127725 <-> 7351838 #17446 @ 1412194759
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 16073992 <-> 24008363 #17447 @ 1412194759
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 20341021 <-> 20646856 #17448 @ 1412194766
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 15694621 <-> 54659899 #17449 @ 1412194766
GPU0: 5350 c/m | ART: 41.65 ms (38.81/23.29/20.42)
GPU1: 6058 c/m | ART: 36.8 ms (57.79/24.81/22.33)
22:19:43 | 11409 c/m | 22.28 sh/m | VL: 17377 (99.59%) | RJ: 42 (0.24%) | ST: 30
(0.17%) | ART: 39.07 ms (48.89/24.09/21.43)
one batch total:
GPU0: 5350 c/m | ART: 41.65 ms (38.81/23.29/20.42)
GPU1: 6058 c/m | ART: 36.8 ms (57.79/24.81/22.33)
11409 c/m | 22.28 sh/m | VL: 17377 (99.59%) | RJ: 42 (0.24%) | ST: 30 (0.17%) | ART: 39.07 ms (48.89/24.09/21.43)
Total share value/h (estimated): 1298.0276 with -d 0-1 -g 3,3 -a 2
-d 0-1 -g 3,4 -a 2
one batch total:
Total share value/h (estimated): with -d 0-1 -g 3,4 -a 2
-d 0-1 -g 2,3 -a 3
GPU0: 4853 c/m | ART: 45.9 ms (52.18/21/16.42)
GPU1: 6009 c/m | ART: 37.07 ms (63.46/27.87/17.58)
00:48:08 | 10862 c/m | 21.31 sh/m | VL: 3502 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (
0.00%) | ART: 41.02 ms (58.42/24.8/17.06)
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 44359305 <-> 51342209 #3503 @ 1412117275
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 62306626 <-> 13033788 #3504 @ 1412117282
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 65164183 <-> 51291657 #3505 @ 1412117283
GPU0: 4854 c/m | ART: 45.9 ms (52.18/21/16.42)
GPU1: 6009 c/m | ART: 37.07 ms (63.46/27.87/17.58)
00:48:18 | 10863 c/m | 21.31 sh/m | VL: 3505 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (
0.00%) | ART: 41.02 ms (58.42/24.8/17.06)
one batch total:
GPU0: 4854 c/m | ART: 45.9 ms (52.18/21/16.42)
GPU1: 6009 c/m | ART: 37.07 ms (63.46/27.87/17.58)
10863 c/m | 21.31 sh/m | VL: 3505 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 41.02 ms (58.42/24.8/17.06)
Total share value/h (estimated): 1247.2135 with -d 0-1 -g 2,3 -a 3
-d 0-1 -g 3,3 -a 3
one batch total:
Total share value/h (estimated): with -d 0-1 -g 3,3 -a 3
-
Can someone show the proper setting for 290x with clpts 1.3?
I got around 6k cpm for 280x.But only around 5k5 cpm for 290x.
290x looks like the worse deal I've made.
-
I only got 20c/m with my msi 7850 1G card.
driver 13.12 using catalyst13 minter
system: win7x64
card: 5 x msi 7850 1G
280X can get 5000+. but 7850 1G, only got 20c/m? something wrong with my settings?
need some help.
C:\Users\Administrator\Desktop\clpts-v1.3_win_x86-64_Catalyst13>clpts_x86-64 -o
1 -u Pk3mHjZrW3HGmx5jMNaN1GhXT2WgXHjRCz -o 6 -u nanpic.test:x
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v1.3 by NaN
**
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to:
** PTS: PajuVUWrcPn5ksCFfrBiWQXvpwtE29dcN2
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 5 (deviceID 0): Pitcairn (MEM_SIZE: 1 GB)
Name of device #2 / 5 (deviceID 1): Pitcairn (MEM_SIZE: 1 GB)
Name of device #3 / 5 (deviceID 2): Pitcairn (MEM_SIZE: 1 GB)
Name of device #4 / 5 (deviceID 3): Pitcairn (MEM_SIZE: 1 GB)
Name of device #5 / 5 (deviceID 4): Pitcairn (MEM_SIZE: 1 GB)
GPU-deviceIDs: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4
gpu_threads: 1, 1, 1, 1, 1
algorithm: 2, 2, 2, 2, 2
[MASTER] | Spawning 5 worker threads
[WORKER0[[WORKER4] He[W] WO[WllORHeRKORo,KEllERKE R3o,2]R1Wo] He] rl d!llo, Wor
ld
Hello, World!
Hello, World!
!
World!
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Pitcairn':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 283)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 286)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 188)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 302)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 293)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 345)
Unrolled as requested!
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Pitcairn':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 283)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 286)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 188)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 302)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 293)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 345)
Unrolled as requested!
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Pitcairn':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 283)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 286)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 188)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 302)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 293)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 345)
Unrolled as requested!
connected to 112.124.13.238:28988
xpt: Logged in with Pk3mHjZrW3HGmx5jMNaN1GhXT2WgXHjRCz
[MASTER] @ 00:23:12 | work received | sharetarget 0x03ffffffffffffffffffffffffff
ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Pitcairn':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 283)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 286)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 188)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 302)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 293)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 345)
Unrolled as requested!
Messages during compilation of program for device 'Pitcairn':
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 283)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 286)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 188)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 302)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 293)
Unrolled as requested!
LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 345)
Unrolled as requested!
[GPU4/Thread0] share found: 64850244 <-> 15617325 #1 @ 1412180728
GPU0: 60 c/m | ART: 5000 ms (87.84/1700/1696)
GPU1: 36 c/m | ART: 1e+004 ms (72.24/1695/1698)
GPU2: 108 c/m | ART: 5000 ms (72.7/1671/1698)
GPU3: 36 c/m | ART: 5000 ms (72.63/1653/1697)
GPU4: 60 c/m | ART: 5000 ms (72.66/1675/1697)
00:23:23 | 300 c/m | 6 sh/m | VL: 1 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) |
ART: 5556 ms (75.99/1677/1697)
[GPU2/Thread0] share found: 33953901 <-> 46132939 #2 @ 1412180736
GPU0: 72 c/m | ART: 4000 ms (78.86/1787/1731)
GPU1: 66 c/m | ART: 5000 ms (72.69/1776/1741)
GPU2: 114 c/m | ART: 4000 ms (72.81/1770/1732)
GPU3: 18 c/m | ART: 5000 ms (72.61/1672/1697)
GPU4: 48 c/m | ART: 4000 ms (72.82/1769/1731)
00:23:33 | 318 c/m | 6 sh/m | VL: 2 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) |
ART: 4348 ms (74.07/1758/1727)
GPU0: 56 c/m | ART: 4286 ms (77.22/1831/1766)
GPU1: 68 c/m | ART: 5000 ms (72.89/1831/1779)
GPU2: 88 c/m | ART: 4286 ms (72.96/1818/1767)
GPU3: 36 c/m | ART: 4286 ms (72.94/1770/1767)
GPU4: 52 c/m | ART: 4286 ms (72.9/1819/1766)
00:23:43 | 300 c/m | 4 sh/m | VL: 2 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) |
ART: 4412 ms (73.81/1813/1769)
[MASTER] @ 00:23:49 | work received | sharetarget 0x03ffffffffffffffffffffffffff
ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
GPU0: 48 c/m | ART: 4444 ms (76.31/1861/1788)
GPU1: 54 c/m | ART: 5000 ms (72.97/1865/1801)
GPU2: 87 c/m | ART: 4000 ms (73.03/1851/1793)
GPU3: 39 c/m | ART: 4444 ms (73.02/1806/1789)
GPU4: 54 c/m | ART: 4000 ms (72.96/1860/1792)
00:23:53 | 282 c/m | 3 sh/m | VL: 2 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) |
ART: 4348 ms (73.64/1849/1792)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 10416248 <-> 51609204 #3 @ 1412180766
GPU0: 53 c/m | ART: 4167 ms (75.55/1893/1812)
GPU1: 48 c/m | ART: 4545 ms (73.02/1899/1823)
GPU2: 82 c/m | ART: 4167 ms (73.07/1877/1813)
GPU3: 43 c/m | ART: 4167 ms (73.06/1842/1813)
GPU4: 53 c/m | ART: 4167 ms (72.99/1887/1812)
00:24:03 | 278 c/m | 3.6 sh/m | VL: 3 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%)
| ART: 4237 ms (73.55/1879/1814)
[INFO] @ 00:24:13 | mining 36s for developer
GPxpt: ULogged 0in :with Pk3mHjZrW3HGmx5jMNaN1GhXT2WgXHjRCz
48[MASTER] @ c/m00:24:13 | | ARwork Treceived :| sharetarget 40x2038ff6ff ffm
s (ff7ff5.ff2ff1ff/ff1ff9ff1ff1ff/ff1ff8ff2ff7ff)ff
GPffUff1ff:ff ff54ff ffcff/ffmff ff| ffA
RT: 4615 ms (73.07/1917/1838)
GPU2: 76 c/m | ART: 4286 ms (73.08/1898/1828)
GPU3: 52 c/m | ART: 4286 ms (73.08/1867/1828)
GPU4: 48 c/m | ART: 4286 ms (73/1907/1827)
00:24:13 | 278 c/m | 3 sh/m | VL: 3 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) |
ART: 4348 ms (73.49/1900/1829)
GPU0: 49 c/m | ART: 4438 ms (74.88/1929/1840)
GPU1: 59 c/m | ART: 4438 ms (73.03/1943/1856)
GPU2: 69 c/m | ART: 4176 ms (73.04/1926/1847)
GPU3: 54 c/m | ART: 4176 ms (73.04/1899/1847)
GPU4: 49 c/m | ART: 4176 ms (72.97/1933/1846)
00:24:24 | 281 c/m | 2.535 sh/m | VL: 3 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%
) | ART: 4277 ms (73.38/1926/1847)
GPU0: 48 c/m | ART: 4444 ms (74.71/1941/1849)
GPU1: 57 c/m | ART: 4706 ms (73.04/1946/1860)
GPU2: 64 c/m | ART: 4444 ms (73.05/1930/1850)
GPU3: 51 c/m | ART: 4444 ms (73.06/1904/1850)
GPU4: 44 c/m | ART: 4444 ms (72.98/1937/1849)
00:24:33 | 264 c/m | 2.25 sh/m | VL: 3 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%)
| ART: 4494 ms (73.37/1931/1852)
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 11057182 <-> 57391468 #4 @ 1412180802
[INFO] @ 00:24:44 | mining 30min for user
GPxpt: ULogged 0in :with Pk3mHjZrW3HGmx5jMNaN1GhXT2WgXHjRCz
55 [MASTER] c@ /00:24:44m || work ARreceived T| : sharetarget 0x03ffffffff4ff3
33 ffmffsff ff(ff7ff4ff.ff5ff1/1ff9ff56/1ff8ff6ff1ff)
GPffUff1ff:ff ff5ff9ff ffcff/ffmff
| ART: 4550 ms (73.08/1962/1871)
GPU2: 70 c/m | ART: 4333 ms (73.07/1948/1862)
GPU3: 55 c/m | ART: 4333 ms (73.05/1926/1862)
GPU4: 47 c/m | ART: 4333 ms (72.99/1954/1861)
00:24:44 | 287 c/m | 2.637 sh/m | VL: 4 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%
) | ART: 4375 ms (73.34/1949/1864)
GPU0: 55 c/m | ART: 4348 ms (74.39/1968/1869)
GPU1: 55 c/m | ART: 4545 ms (73.08/1974/1878)
GPU2: 71 c/m | ART: 4348 ms (73.08/1960/1870)
GPU3: 53 c/m | ART: 4348 ms (73.06/1940/1870)
GPU4: 44 c/m | ART: 4348 ms (72.99/1966/1870)
00:24:53 | 278 c/m | 2.4 sh/m | VL: 4 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%)
| ART: 4386 ms (73.32/1961/1872)
GPU0: 52 c/m | ART: 4480 ms (74.29/1974/1875)
GPU1: 51 c/m | ART: 4480 ms (73.1/1984/1886)
GPU2: 69 c/m | ART: 4308 ms (73.08/1971/1878)
GPU3: 50 c/m | ART: 4308 ms (73.07/1953/1878)
GPU4: 45 c/m | ART: 4308 ms (73.02/1976/1878)
00:25:05 | 268 c/m | 2.143 sh/m | VL: 4 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%
) | ART: 4375 ms (73.31/1971/1879)
GPU0: 53 c/m | ART: 4481 ms (74.22/1978/1879)
GPU1: 54 c/m | ART: 4321 ms (73.11/1990/1891)
GPU2: 74 c/m | ART: 4172 ms (73.11/1979/1884)
GPU3: 49 c/m | ART: 4172 ms (73.08/1963/1884)
GPU4: 48 c/m | ART: 4172 ms (73.04/1983/1884)
00:25:19 | 277 c/m | 1.983 sh/m | VL: 4 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%
) | ART: 4261 ms (73.3/1978/1885)
[MASTER] @ 00:25:19 | work received | sharetarget 0x03ffffffffffffffffffffffffff
ffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffffff
GPU0: 53 c/m | ART: 4483 ms (74.16/1985/1884)
GPU1: 50 c/m | ART: 4483 ms (73.11/1990/1892)
GPU2: 69 c/m | ART: 4333 ms (73.12/1979/1886)
GPU3: 45 c/m | ART: 4333 ms (73.09/1964/1885)
GPU4: 46 c/m | ART: 4333 ms (73.04/1983/1885)
00:25:23 | 263 c/m | 1.846 sh/m | VL: 4 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%
) | ART: 4392 ms (73.3/1980/1886)
GPU0: 56 c/m | ART: 4375 ms (74.26/1991/1889)
GPU1: 51 c/m | ART: 4516 ms (73.11/1996/1896)
GPU2: 65 c/m | ART: 4375 ms (73.12/1985/1889)
GPU3: 44 c/m | ART: 4375 ms (73.09/1971/1889)
GPU4: 48 c/m | ART: 4375 ms (73.06/1989/1889)
00:25:33 | 263 c/m | 1.714 sh/m | VL: 4 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%
) | ART: 4403 ms (73.33/1986/1890)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 21610288 <-> 13855878 #5 @ 1412180865
GPU0: 55 c/m | ART: 4412 ms (74.2/1991/1889)
GPU1: 51 c/m | ART: 4545 ms (73.12/1995/1896)
GPU2: 62 c/m | ART: 4412 ms (73.12/1985/1890)
GPU3: 44 c/m | ART: 4412 ms (73.1/1972/1890)
GPU4: 47 c/m | ART: 4412 ms (73.06/1989/1890)
00:25:42 | 260 c/m | 2 sh/m | VL: 5 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) |
ART: 4438 ms (73.32/1986/1891)
GPU0: 52 c/m | ART: 4444 ms (74.15/1992/1891)
GPU1: 52 c/m | ART: 4571 ms (73.13/1995/1897)
GPU2: 61 c/m | ART: 4444 ms (73.12/1986/1891)
GPU3: 44 c/m | ART: 4444 ms (73.11/1974/1891)
GPU4: 46 c/m | ART: 4324 ms (73.08/1993/1892)
00:25:53 | 254 c/m | 1.875 sh/m | VL: 5 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%
) | ART: 4444 ms (73.32/1988/1892)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 31048566 <-> 34591805 #6 @ 1412180882
[GPU4/Thread0] share found: 3585539 <-> 22983381 #7 @ 1412180891
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 46433756 <-> 22803539 #8 @ 1412180891
GPU0: 52 c/m | ART: 4359 ms (74.1/1994/1892)
GPU1: 53 c/m | ART: 4474 ms (73.14/1996/1898)
GPU2: 62 c/m | ART: 4359 ms (73.13/1988/1893)
GPU3: 47 c/m | ART: 4359 ms (73.12/1976/1893)
GPU4: 49 c/m | ART: 4359 ms (73.08/1992/1892)
00:26:03 | 263 c/m | 2.824 sh/m | VL: 8 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%
) | ART: 4381 ms (73.31/1989/1894)
GPU0: 51 c/m | ART: 4390 ms (74.27/1997/1895)
GPU1: 53 c/m | ART: 4500 ms (73.13/2000/1900)
GPU2: 61 c/m | ART: 4390 ms (73.14/1992/1895)
GPU3: 48 c/m | ART: 4390 ms (73.11/1981/1895)
GPU4: 48 c/m | ART: 4390 ms (73.09/1995/1895)
00:26:13 | 261 c/m | 2.667 sh/m | VL: 8 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%
) | ART: 4412 ms (73.35/1993/1896)
-
Can someone show the proper setting for 290x with clpts 1.3?
I got around 6k cpm for 280x.But only around 5k5 cpm for 290x.
290x looks like the worse deal I've made.
Mario241077 seems to get best results with -g 3 -a 2 using a 290x (over 6400cpm, but I'm not sure whether it runs at reference clocks).
-
I only got 20c/m with my msi 7850 1G card.
driver 13.12 using catalyst13 minter
system: win7x64
card: 5 x msi 7850 1G
[...]
Could you use GPU-Z to monitor RAM usage of the GPUs? If large amounts of dynamic memory are allocated then the low performance is caused by a driver bug. Also I am interested whether the problem shows up if the miner uses a single card. I have no idea whether a driver update would help.
-
Can someone show the proper setting for 290x with clpts 1.3?
I got around 6k cpm for 280x.But only around 5k5 cpm for 290x.
290x looks like the worse deal I've made.
I don't have one, but I saw in the readme that you need to run it with 3 threads.
I only got 20c/m with my msi 7850 1G card.
driver 13.12 using catalyst13 minter
system: win7x64
card: 5 x msi 7850 1G
280X can get 5000+. but 7850 1G, only got 20c/m? something wrong with my settings?
need some help.
C:\Users\Administrator\Desktop\clpts-v1.3_win_x86-64_Catalyst13>clpts_x86-64 -o
1 -u Pk3mHjZrW3HGmx5jMNaN1GhXT2WgXHjRCz -o 6 -u nanpic.test:x
*****************************************************************************
** clpts - OpenCL PTS Pool Miner v1.3 by NaN
**
** If you like this software, please consider sending tips to:
** PTS: PajuVUWrcPn5ksCFfrBiWQXvpwtE29dcN2
** BTC: 1AumJ5uzz1nuER7pBA6Bh4gNusaxhN85rc
** Your donations will encourage further optimization and development
**
** press CTRL+C to exit
*****************************************************************************
Vendor of used platform (#1 / 1): Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Name of device #1 / 5 (deviceID 0): Pitcairn (MEM_SIZE: 1 GB)
Name of device #2 / 5 (deviceID 1): Pitcairn (MEM_SIZE: 1 GB)
Name of device #3 / 5 (deviceID 2): Pitcairn (MEM_SIZE: 1 GB)
Name of device #4 / 5 (deviceID 3): Pitcairn (MEM_SIZE: 1 GB)
Name of device #5 / 5 (deviceID 4): Pitcairn (MEM_SIZE: 1 GB)
GPU-deviceIDs: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4
gpu_threads: 1, 1, 1, 1, 1
algorithm: 2, 2, 2, 2, 2
[snip]
So is that on 5 gpu's? Does changing the number of threads and trying other algorithms help? Btw the 280X does not do 6k on stock clocks. But it will comfortably run over 5k.
-
Can someone show the proper setting for 290x with clpts 1.3?
I got around 6k cpm for 280x.But only around 5k5 cpm for 290x.
290x looks like the worse deal I've made.
Mario241077 seems to get best results with -g 3 -a 2 using a 290x (over 6400cpm, but I'm not sure whether it runs at reference clocks).
yes -g 3 -a 2 seems best runs in the reference clock, I have not changed anything.
1050 MHz GPU and 1350 MHz memory
Driver is but 14.9. this brings performance
-
give the command line to run 280 please(bat file)
-
Can someone show the proper setting for 290x with clpts 1.3?
I got around 6k cpm for 280x.But only around 5k5 cpm for 290x.
290x looks like the worse deal I've made.
Mario241077 seems to get best results with -g 3 -a 2 using a 290x (over 6400cpm, but I'm not sure whether it runs at reference clocks).
yes -g 3 -a 2 seems best runs in the reference clock, I have not changed anything.
1050 MHz GPU and 1350 MHz memory
Driver is but 14.9. this brings performance
Sapphire 290x Tri-x?
-
Win7 x64
H7970 3 GB und R 290x 4GB
driver 14.9
device 0
HD 7970 3GB with the old version 1.2 -t 0,0
4350 c/m / 8,564 sh/m / ART 51,2 /
yppool shows before ca. 500 shares / hour
-g 2 -a 2 602.5975 s/ hour
5381 c/m | 10.37 sh/m | VL: 5077 (99.32%) | RJ: 26 (0.51%) | ST: 9 (0.18%) | ART: 41.42 ms (39.04/22.7/19.98)
10:25:46 | 5382 c/m | 10.39 sh/m | VL: 5075 (99.32%) | RJ: 26 (0.51%) | ST: 9 (0
.18%) | ART: 41.42 ms (39.04/22.7/19.98)
10:25:56 | 5381 c/m | 10.38 sh/m | VL: 5075 (99.32%) | RJ: 26 (0.51%) | ST: 9 (0
.18%) | ART: 41.42 ms (39.04/22.7/19.98)
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 49796323 <-> 48951943 #3741 @ 1412324742
10:26:06 | 5381 c/m | 10.38 sh/m | VL: 5076 (99.32%) | RJ: 26 (0.51%) | ST: 9 (0
.18%) | ART: 41.42 ms (39.04/22.7/19.98)
10:26:16 | 5381 c/m | 10.38 sh/m | VL: 5076 (99.32%) | RJ: 26 (0.51%) | ST: 9 (0
.18%) | ART: 41.42 ms (39.04/22.7/19.98)
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 34813452 <-> 39994762 #3742 @ 1412324764
[MASTER] @ 10:26:20 | work received | sharetarget 0x0080000000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000000000
10:26:26 | 5381 c/m | 10.37 sh/m | VL: 5077 (99.32%) | RJ: 26 (0.51%) | ST: 9 (0
.18%) | ART: 41.42 ms (39.04/22.7/19.98)
5381 c/m | 10.37 sh/m | VL: 5077 (99.32%) | RJ: 26 (0.51%) | ST: 9 (0.18%) | ART: 41.42 ms (39.04/22.7/19.98)
-g 3 -a 2 604.7504 s/ hour
5311 c/m | 10.41 sh/m | VL: 5151 (99.33%) | RJ: 21 (0.40%) | ST: 14 (0.27%) | ART: 41.87 ms (38.82/23.17/20.28)
[GPU0/Thread2] share found: 60899126 <-> 42998757 #5178 @ 1412355071
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 8600366 <-> 24989453 #5179 @ 1412355074
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 1801279 <-> 38638618 #5180 @ 1412355076
18:51:34 | 5311 c/m | 10.41 sh/m | VL: 5145 (99.32%) | RJ: 21 (0.41%) | ST: 14 (
0.27%) | ART: 41.87 ms (38.82/23.17/20.28)
[GPU0/Thread2] share found: 10803320 <-> 29049508 #5181 @ 1412355085
18:51:44 | 5311 c/m | 10.41 sh/m | VL: 5146 (99.32%) | RJ: 21 (0.41%) | ST: 14 (
0.27%) | ART: 41.87 ms (38.82/23.17/20.28)
[MASTER] @ 18:51:46 | work received | sharetarget 0x0080000000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000000000
18:51:54 | 5311 c/m | 10.41 sh/m | VL: 5146 (99.32%) | RJ: 21 (0.41%) | ST: 14 (
0.27%) | ART: 41.87 ms (38.82/23.17/20.28)
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 60613096 <-> 23205600 #5182 @ 1412355105
[GPU0/Thread2] share found: 27025344 <-> 2484690 #5183 @ 1412355107
[GPU0/Thread2] share found: 4127553 <-> 21929310 #5184 @ 1412355108
[GPU0/Thread2] share found: 50218160 <-> 60220400 #5185 @ 1412355109
18:52:04 | 5311 c/m | 10.41 sh/m | VL: 5150 (99.32%) | RJ: 21 (0.41%) | ST: 14 (
0.27%) | ART: 41.87 ms (38.82/23.17/20.28)
[GPU0/Thread2] share found: 61832158 <-> 57103129 #5186 @ 1412355114
5311 c/m | 10.41 sh/m | VL: 5151 (99.33%) | RJ: 21 (0.40%) | ST: 14 (0.27%) | ART: 41.87 ms (38.82/23.17/20.28)
-g 2 -a 3
-g 3 -a 3
device 1
R290x with the old version 1.2 -t 1,1
5589 c/m 11,05 sh/m Art 2.521
yppool shows before ca. 600 shares / hour
-g 2 -a 2
-g 3 -a 2 714.8656 s/ hour
6226 c/m | 12.32 sh/m | VL: 5998 (99.26%) | RJ: 28 (0.46%) | ST: 17 (0.28%) | ART: 35.79 ms (56.83/23.3/21.89)
10:28:33 | 6226 c/m | 12.32 sh/m | VL: 5992 (99.25%) | RJ: 28 (0.46%) | ST: 17 (
0.28%) | ART: 35.79 ms (56.83/23.3/21.89)
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 12723126 <-> 60376140 #4472 @ 1412324899
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 7522004 <-> 30989061 #4473 @ 1412324907
10:28:43 | 6226 c/m | 12.32 sh/m | VL: 5994 (99.25%) | RJ: 28 (0.46%) | ST: 17 (
0.28%) | ART: 35.79 ms (56.83/23.3/21.89)
[MASTER] @ 10:28:49 | work received | sharetarget 0x0080000000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000000000
10:28:53 | 6226 c/m | 12.32 sh/m | VL: 5994 (99.25%) | RJ: 28 (0.46%) | ST: 17 (
0.28%) | ART: 35.79 ms (56.83/23.3/21.89)
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 32445251 <-> 60399387 #4474 @ 1412324918
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 36394851 <-> 2568172 #4475 @ 1412324920
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 10151576 <-> 33329119 #4476 @ 1412324926
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 11395582 <-> 65076882 #4477 @ 1412324926
6226 c/m | 12.32 sh/m | VL: 5998 (99.26%) | RJ: 28 (0.46%) | ST: 17 (0.28%) | ART: 35.79 ms (56.83/23.3/21.89)
second test with -d 0 -g 3 -a 2 for the first card together
6093 c/m | 12.18 sh/m | VL: 6073 (99.57%) | RJ: 14 (0.23%) | ST: 12 (0.20%) | ART: 36.56 ms (56.56/24.05/22.05)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 1411120 <-> 52591321 #6091 @ 1412355272
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 46137513 <-> 19222248 #6092 @ 1412355272
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 15589530 <-> 30681702 #6093 @ 1412355276
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 44881670 <-> 2854381 #6094 @ 1412355277
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 5281636 <-> 33263649 #6095 @ 1412355277
18:54:52 | 6093 c/m | 12.18 sh/m | VL: 6068 (99.57%) | RJ: 14 (0.23%) | ST: 12 (
0.20%) | ART: 36.56 ms (56.56/24.05/22.05)
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 45814077 <-> 42708206 #6096 @ 1412355281
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 44092494 <-> 1284521 #6097 @ 1412355281
18:55:02 | 6093 c/m | 12.18 sh/m | VL: 6071 (99.57%) | RJ: 14 (0.23%) | ST: 12 (
0.20%) | ART: 36.56 ms (56.56/24.05/22.05)
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 26617870 <-> 32157778 #6098 @ 1412355289
[MASTER] @ 18:55:08 | work received | sharetarget 0x0080000000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000000000000000000
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 19728627 <-> 64240822 #6099 @ 1412355296
6093 c/m | 12.18 sh/m | VL: 6073 (99.57%) | RJ: 14 (0.23%) | ST: 12 (0.20%) | ART: 36.56 ms (56.56/24.05/22.05)
-g 3 -a 3
-g 3 -a 4
two batches
Total share value/h (estimated): -d 0 -g 2 -a 2 / -d 1 -g 2 -a 2
Total share value/h (estimated): 1316.0570 -d 0 -g 2 -a 2 / -d 1 -g 3 -a 2
Total share value/h (estimated): 1313.8650 -d 0 -g 3 -a 2 / -d 1 -g 3 -a 2
Total share value/h (estimated):
Total share value/h (estimated):
Total share value/h (estimated): -d 0 -g 2 -a 3 / -d 1 -g 3 -a 3
Total share value/h (estimated):
Total share value/h (estimated): -d 0 -g 3 -a 3 / -d 1 -g 4 -a 3
-d 0-1 -g 2,2 -a 2
GPU0: 5348 c/m | ART: 41.63 ms (39.08/23/20.47)
GPU1: 5755 c/m | ART: 38.67 ms (34.24/11.93/18.37)
22:17:36 | 11103 c/m | 21.76 sh/m | VL: 15759 (99.58%) | RJ: 47 (0.30%) | ST: 19
(0.12%) | ART: 40.1 ms (36.57/17.26/19.38)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 51025672 <-> 9548007 #15826 @ 1412453839
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 64340379 <-> 50475184 #15827 @ 1412453842
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 51964084 <-> 59247824 #15828 @ 1412453844
GPU0: 5348 c/m | ART: 41.63 ms (39.08/23/20.47)
GPU1: 5755 c/m | ART: 38.67 ms (34.24/11.93/18.37)
22:17:46 | 11103 c/m | 21.76 sh/m | VL: 15762 (99.58%) | RJ: 47 (0.30%) | ST: 19
(0.12%) | ART: 40.1 ms (36.57/17.26/19.38)
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 49074569 <-> 3918240 #15829 @ 1412453849
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 16119352 <-> 57985256 #15830 @ 1412453852
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 17443259 <-> 6613474 #15831 @ 1412453853
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 33596803 <-> 32157687 #15832 @ 1412453856
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 34145137 <-> 33202561 #15833 @ 1412453857
GPU0: 5348 c/m | ART: 41.63 ms (39.08/23/20.47)
GPU1: 5755 c/m | ART: 38.67 ms (34.24/11.93/18.37)
11103 c/m | 21.76 sh/m | VL: 15767 (99.58%) | RJ: 47 (0.30%) | ST: 19 (0.12%) | ART: 40.1 ms (36.57/17.26/19.38)
one batch total:
GPU0: 5348 c/m | ART: 41.63 ms (39.08/23/20.47)
GPU1: 5755 c/m | ART: 38.67 ms (34.24/11.93/18.37)
11103 c/m | 21.76 sh/m | VL: 15767 (99.58%) | RJ: 47 (0.30%) | ST: 19 (0.12%) | ART: 40.1 ms (36.57/17.26/19.38)
Total share value/h (estimated): 1345.7876 with -d 0-1 -g 2,2 -a 2
-d 0-1 -g 2,3 -a 2
GPU0: 5392 c/m | ART: 41.3 ms (38.8/23.14/20.03)
GPU1: 6473 c/m | ART: 34.38 ms (55.34/21.58/21.06)
22:01:49 | 11865 c/m | 23.01 sh/m | VL: 14980 (99.95%) | RJ: 3 (0.02%) | ST: 5 (
0.03%) | ART: 37.53 ms (47.83/22.29/20.59)
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 762250 <-> 28420499 #14989 @ 1412107305
GPU0: 5392 c/m | ART: 41.3 ms (38.8/23.14/20.03)
GPU1: 6473 c/m | ART: 34.38 ms (55.34/21.58/21.06)
11865 c/m | 23 sh/m | VL: 14981 (99.95%) | RJ: 3 (0.02%) | ST: 5 (0.03%) | ART: 37.53 ms (47.83/22.29/20.59)
one batch total:
GPU0: 5392 c/m | ART: 41.3 ms (38.8/23.14/20.03)
GPU1: 6473 c/m | ART: 34.38 ms (55.34/21.58/21.06)
11865 c/m | 23 sh/m | VL: 14981 (99.95%) | RJ: 3 (0.02%) | ST: 5 (0.03%) | ART: 37.53 ms (47.83/22.29/20.59)
Total share value/h (estimated): 1345.7876 with -d 0-1 -g 2,3 -a 2
-d 0-1 -g 2,4 -a 2
GPU0: 5312 c/m | ART: 41.91 ms (39.04/22.97/20.48)
GPU1: 6320 c/m | ART: 35.22 ms (78.57/24.39/20.46)
01:15:39 | 11632 c/m | 22.8 sh/m | VL: 8198 (99.64%) | RJ: 16 (0.19%) | ST: 14 (
0.17%) | ART: 38.28 ms (60.52/23.74/20.47)
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 48809039 <-> 37226404 #8230 @ 1412378127
GPU0: 5312 c/m | ART: 41.91 ms (39.04/22.97/20.48)
GPU1: 6320 c/m | ART: 35.22 ms (78.57/24.39/20.46)
01:15:49 | 11631 c/m | 22.79 sh/m | VL: 8200 (99.64%) | RJ: 16 (0.19%) | ST: 14
(0.17%) | ART: 38.28 ms (60.52/23.74/20.47)
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 52933692 <-> 12414978 #8231 @ 1412378143
GPU0: 5312 c/m | ART: 41.91 ms (39.04/22.97/20.48)
GPU1: 6320 c/m | ART: 35.22 ms (78.57/24.39/20.46)
01:15:59 | 11632 c/m | 22.78 sh/m | VL: 8201 (99.64%) | RJ: 16 (0.19%) | ST: 14
(0.17%) | ART: 38.28 ms (60.52/23.74/20.47)
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 55893404 <-> 2752737 #8232 @ 1412378149
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 56556888 <-> 3653721 #8233 @ 1412378151
GPU0: 5312 c/m | ART: 41.91 ms (39.04/22.97/20.48)
GPU1: 6320 c/m | ART: 35.22 ms (78.57/24.39/20.46)
11632 c/m | 22.77 sh/m | VL: 8203 (99.64%) | RJ: 16 (0.19%) | ST: 14 (0.17%) | ART: 38.28 ms (60.52/23.74/20.47)
one batch total:
GPU0: 5312 c/m | ART: 41.91 ms (39.04/22.97/20.48)
GPU1: 6320 c/m | ART: 35.22 ms (78.57/24.39/20.46)
11632 c/m | 22.77 sh/m | VL: 8203 (99.64%) | RJ: 16 (0.19%) | ST: 14 (0.17%) | ART: 38.28 ms (60.52/23.74/20.47)
Total share value/h (estimated): 1327.1722 with -d 0-1 -g 2,4 -a 2
-d 0-1 -g 3,3 -a 2
GPU0: 5350 c/m | ART: 41.65 ms (38.81/23.29/20.42)
GPU1: 6058 c/m | ART: 36.8 ms (57.79/24.81/22.33)
22:19:23 | 11409 c/m | 22.29 sh/m | VL: 17370 (99.59%) | RJ: 42 (0.24%) | ST: 30
(0.17%) | ART: 39.07 ms (48.89/24.09/21.43)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 64228962 <-> 23798246 #17443 @ 1412194748
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 55359495 <-> 25672418 #17444 @ 1412194749
[GPU0/Thread2] share found: 62732236 <-> 66795173 #17445 @ 1412194755
GPU0: 5350 c/m | ART: 41.65 ms (38.81/23.29/20.42)
GPU1: 6058 c/m | ART: 36.8 ms (57.79/24.81/22.33)
22:19:33 | 11409 c/m | 22.28 sh/m | VL: 17373 (99.59%) | RJ: 42 (0.24%) | ST: 30
(0.17%) | ART: 39.07 ms (48.89/24.09/21.43)
[GPU0/Thread2] share found: 22127725 <-> 7351838 #17446 @ 1412194759
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 16073992 <-> 24008363 #17447 @ 1412194759
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 20341021 <-> 20646856 #17448 @ 1412194766
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 15694621 <-> 54659899 #17449 @ 1412194766
GPU0: 5350 c/m | ART: 41.65 ms (38.81/23.29/20.42)
GPU1: 6058 c/m | ART: 36.8 ms (57.79/24.81/22.33)
22:19:43 | 11409 c/m | 22.28 sh/m | VL: 17377 (99.59%) | RJ: 42 (0.24%) | ST: 30 (0.17%) | ART: 39.07 ms (48.89/24.09/21.43)
one batch total:
GPU0: 5350 c/m | ART: 41.65 ms (38.81/23.29/20.42)
GPU1: 6058 c/m | ART: 36.8 ms (57.79/24.81/22.33)
11409 c/m | 22.28 sh/m | VL: 17377 (99.59%) | RJ: 42 (0.24%) | ST: 30 (0.17%) | ART: 39.07 ms (48.89/24.09/21.43)
Total share value/h (estimated): 1298.0276 with -d 0-1 -g 3,3 -a 2
-d 0-1 -g 2,2 -a 3
GPU0: 4889 c/m | ART: 45.61 ms (52.82/21.3/16.47)
GPU1: 5721 c/m | ART: 38.93 ms (40.21/24.19/12.65)
10:07:26 | 10610 c/m | 21.02 sh/m | VL: 9266 (99.57%) | RJ: 24 (0.26%) | ST: 16
(0.17%) | ART: 42.01 ms (46.02/22.86/14.41)
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 61031989 <-> 37156888 #7208 @ 1412410029
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 11406483 <-> 5469136 #7209 @ 1412410030
[GPU1/Thread1] share found: 64887363 <-> 49728901 #7210 @ 1412410030
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 49651501 <-> 12160712 #7211 @ 1412410032
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 5104108 <-> 12971170 #7212 @ 1412410035
GPU0: 4889 c/m | ART: 45.61 ms (52.82/21.3/16.47)
GPU1: 5721 c/m | ART: 38.93 ms (40.21/24.19/12.65)
10610 c/m | 21.02 sh/m | VL: 9271 (99.57%) | RJ: 24 (0.26%) | ST: 16 (0.17%) | ART: 42.01 ms (46.01/22.86/14.41)
one batch total:
GPU0: 4889 c/m | ART: 45.61 ms (52.82/21.3/16.47)
GPU1: 5721 c/m | ART: 38.93 ms (40.21/24.19/12.65)
10610 c/m | 21.02 sh/m | VL: 9271 (99.57%) | RJ: 24 (0.26%) | ST: 16 (0.17%) | ART: 42.01 ms (46.01/22.86/14.41)
Total share value/h (estimated): 1222.9450 with -d 0-1 -g 2,2 -a 3
-d 0-1 -g 2,3 -a 3
GPU0: 4853 c/m | ART: 45.9 ms (52.18/21/16.42)
GPU1: 6009 c/m | ART: 37.07 ms (63.46/27.87/17.58)
00:48:08 | 10862 c/m | 21.31 sh/m | VL: 3502 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (
0.00%) | ART: 41.02 ms (58.42/24.8/17.06)
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 44359305 <-> 51342209 #3503 @ 1412117275
[GPU1/Thread2] share found: 62306626 <-> 13033788 #3504 @ 1412117282
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 65164183 <-> 51291657 #3505 @ 1412117283
GPU0: 4854 c/m | ART: 45.9 ms (52.18/21/16.42)
GPU1: 6009 c/m | ART: 37.07 ms (63.46/27.87/17.58)
00:48:18 | 10863 c/m | 21.31 sh/m | VL: 3505 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 41.02 ms (58.42/24.8/17.06)
one batch total:
GPU0: 4854 c/m | ART: 45.9 ms (52.18/21/16.42)
GPU1: 6009 c/m | ART: 37.07 ms (63.46/27.87/17.58)
10863 c/m | 21.31 sh/m | VL: 3505 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 41.02 ms (58.42/24.8/17.06)
Total share value/h (estimated): 1247.2135 with -d 0-1 -g 2,3 -a 3
-d 0-1 -g 3,3 -a 3
one batch total:
Total share value/h (estimated): with -d 0-1 -g 3,3 -a 3
-
4х280х sapphire vapor-x, core\mem: 1070\1500, -a 2 -g 2
[GPU2/Thread1] share found: 13501173 <-> 64123134 #146012 @ 1412420010
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 59898910 <-> 59820904 #146013 @ 1412420011
[GPU3/Thread0] share found: 3918475 <-> 17265892 #146014 @ 1412420013
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 40611214 <-> 52766270 #146015 @ 1412420014
[GPU3/Thread1] share found: 2066546 <-> 60821852 #146016 @ 1412420014
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 46169239 <-> 12521161 #146017 @ 1412420018
GPU0: 5053 c/m | ART: 44.07 ms (41.38/25.31/20.47)
GPU1: 5037 c/m | ART: 44.19 ms (41.45/25.47/20.51)
GPU2: 5061 c/m | ART: 43.97 ms (41.36/25.29/20.37)
GPU3: 4989 c/m | ART: 44.62 ms (41.86/25.05/21.33)
14:54:11 | 20140 c/m | 39.13 sh/m | VL: 167372 (99.37%) | RJ: 782 (0.46%) | ST:
271 (0.16%) | ART: 44.21 ms (41.51/25.28/20.67)
-
Isn't PTS moving away from mining?
-
Not yet =) But now difficulty is very high for mining
-
3x280 Gigabyte & 1x280 MSI OC Ubuntu 14.04 Catalist 14.6 beta
-a 2 -g 2 1100/1250 65-70 C
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 21610986 <-> 33129875 #184 @ 1413220965
[GPU3/Thread1] share found: 20852677 <-> 46798377 #185 @ 1413220966
[GPU3/Thread0] share found: 44769705 <-> 36265738 #186 @ 1413220966
[GPU3/Thread1] share found: 40536603 <-> 9145183 #187 @ 1413220967
[GPU0/Thread0] share found: 31988857 <-> 51157364 #188 @ 1413220969
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 34936063 <-> 32924991 #189 @ 1413220970
[GPU3/Thread1] share found: 43755518 <-> 40357391 #190 @ 1413220972
[GPU2/Thread0] share found: 28179486 <-> 53226872 #191 @ 1413220972
[GPU0/Thread1] share found: 25163139 <-> 29766855 #192 @ 1413220973
[GPU1/Thread0] share found: 33967872 <-> 12550562 #193 @ 1413220974
[GPU3/Thread1] share found: 64704632 <-> 32490938 #194 @ 1413220974
GPU0: 5655 c/m | ART: 39.7 ms (37.8/21.17/19.32)
GPU1: 5561 c/m | ART: 39.86 ms (37.18/22.25/19.28)
GPU2: 5500 c/m | ART: 40.55 ms (38.35/22.35/19.46) <-- MSI
GPU3: 5376 c/m | ART: 40.89 ms (38.76/22.51/19.56)
20:23:26 | 22092 c/m | 38.8 sh/m | VL: 193 (100.00%) | RJ: 0 (0.00%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 40.24 ms (38.01/22.06/19.4)
-
win 7 64x driver 14.6
I use the monitor at the R 290X
I use the command line
setx GPU_FORCE_64BIT_PTR 1
setx GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PRECENT 100
these I have taken from the mines bfgminer description for Scrypt
-t 0,0 -a 0 HD 7970 4041=c/m - 7.86=sh/m - GPU 1000 Mhz - Memory 1375 MHZ - ART=55.2 - Share value/h on ypool.net=456.65 - stable trend after shares total 1483
-t 1,1 -a 0 R 290X 5117=c/m - 10.25=sh/m - GPU 1050 Mhz - Memory 1350 MHZ - ART=2.832e+008 - Share value/h on ypool.net=594.06 - stable trend after shares total 3961 - 22:02:42 | 5117 c/m | 10.25 sh/m | VL: 3961 (98.85%) | RJ: 39 (0.97%) | ST: 7 (0.17%) | ART: 2.832e+008 ms (40.46/27.2/18.85)
-t 0,0 -a 1 HD 7970 4357=c/m - 8.64=sh/m - GPU 1000 Mhz - Memory 1375 MHZ - ART=51.17 - Share value/h on ypool.net=500.62 - stable trend after shares total 3633 - 21:51:21 | 4358 c/m | 8.664 sh/m | VL: 3633 (98.75%) | RJ: 42 (1.14%) | ST: 4 (.11%) | ART: 51.17 ms (56.87/21.57/23.26)
-t 1,1 -a 1 R 290X 5534=c/m - 10.98=sh/m - GPU 1050 Mhz - Memory 1350 MHZ - ART=2.496+008 - Share value/h on ypool.net=635.32 - stable trend after shares total 2597
-t 0,0 -a 2 HD 7970 4008=c/m - 7.78=sh/m - GPU 1000 Mhz - Memory 1375 MHZ - ART=55.92 - Share value/h on ypool.net=449.63 - stable trend after shares total 2286 - 02:51:32 | 4008 c/m | 7.79 sh/m | VL: 2265 (98.65%) | RJ: 29 (1.26%) | ST: 2 (0.09%) | ART: 55.93 ms (53.55/24.97/32.83)
-t 1,1 -a 2 R 290X 5067=c/m - 9.51=sh/m - GPU 1050 Mhz - Memory 1350 MHZ - ART=1.213e+008 - Share value/h on ypool.net=547.37 - stable trend after shares total 1965 - 07:55:00 | 5067 c/m | 9.477 sh/m | VL: 3461 (98.63%) | RJ: 47 (1.34%) | ST: 1 (0.03%) | ART: 1.213e+008 ms (70.35/44.51/37.01)
-t 0,0 -a 3 HD 7970 4400=c/m - 8.43=sh/m - GPU 1000 Mhz - Memory 1375 MHZ - ART=50.5 - Share value/h on ypool.net=491,37 - stable trend after shares total 5730 - 22:49:05 | 4409 c/m | 8.514 sh/m | VL: 5730 (98.76%) | RJ: 68 (1.17%) | ST: 4 (0.07%) | ART: 50.91 ms (56.71/21.36/23.28)
-t 1,1 -a 3 R 290X 5359=c/m - 10.39=sh/m - GPU 1050 Mhz - Memory 1350 MHZ - ART=1.64e+008 - Share value/h on ypool.net=602.42 - stable trend after shares total 3062 - 03:00:47 | 5359 c/m | 10.39 sh/m | VL: 3031 (99.15%) | RJ: 26 (0.85%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 1.64e+008 ms (40.99/22.25/19.62)
without command line
setx GPU_FORCE_64BIT_PTR 1
setx GPU_MAX_ALLOC_PRECENT 100
-t 0,0 -a 0 HD 7970 =c/m - =sh/m - GPU 1000 Mhz - Memory 1375 MHZ - ART= - Share value/h on ypool.net= - stable trend after shares total
-t 1,1 -a 0 R 290X =c/m - =sh/m - GPU 1050 Mhz - Memory 1350 MHZ - ART= - Share value/h on ypool.net= - stable trend after shares total -
-t 0,0 -a 1 HD 7970 4364=c/m - 8.60=sh/m - GPU 1000 Mhz - Memory 1375 MHZ - ART=51.1 - Share value/h on ypool.net=497.28 - stable trend after shares total 2734 - 08:15:29 | 4364 c/m | 8.588 sh/m | VL: 2702 (98.97%) | RJ: 26 (0.95%) | ST: 2 (0.07%) | ART: 51.1 ms (78.27/29.7/32)
-t 1,1 -a 1 R 290X 5539=c/m - 10.75=sh/m - GPU 1050 Mhz - Memory 1350 MHZ - ART=2.414+008 - Share value/h on ypool.net=621.96 - stable trend after shares total 2706 - 08:43:29 | 5540 c/m | 10.76 sh/m | VL: 3597 (98.82%) | RJ: 43 (1.18%) | ST: 0 (0.00%) | ART: 2.414e+008 ms (53.96/28.07/21.75)
-t 0,0 -a 2 HD 7970 =c/m - =sh/m - GPU 1000 Mhz - Memory 1375 MHZ - ART= - Share value/h on ypool.net=
-t 1,1 -a 2 R 290X =c/m - =sh/m - GPU 1050 Mhz - Memory 1350 MHZ - ART= - Share value/h on ypool.net=
-t 0,0 -a 3 HD 7970 4406=c/m - 8.70=sh/m - GPU 1000 Mhz - Memory 1375 MHZ - ART=50.92 - Share value/h on ypool.net=504.61 - stable trend after shares total 7612 - 23:09:24 | 4406 c/m | 8.704 sh/m | VL: 7813 (99.00%) | RJ: 74 (0.94%) | ST: 5 (0.06%) | ART: 50.92 ms (56.66/21.34/23.27)
-t 1,1 -a 3 R 290X =c/m - =sh/m - GPU 1050 Mhz - Memory 1350 MHZ - ART= - Share value/h on ypool.net=
This ART value is important for NAN
the lower is better
you need min 1200 shares for an optimal result, more is better for correct average value on. you reach only after a very long time and many shares. let it run
-
I've updated clpts to version 2.0, which has support for stratum pools and optimizations for different GPUs (see https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2598.0)
-
@ NaN
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=896133.msg10397793#msg10397793
Not sure what binaries you are referring to that goes in the binary folder.
I just created the bat and ran it from the unzip.
EDIT: I have not used this since version 0.2.2 so if there are big changes I was not aware. Using Windows 7 64 bit. Also the readme is a PITA when you have to scroll left to right to keep reading and the word warp isn't any better.
-
@ NaN
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=896133.msg10397793#msg10397793
Not sure what binaries you are referring to that goes in the binary folder.
I just created the bat and ran it from the unzip.
You have to copy the gpuhash_* files of one Catalyst* folder into the binaries folder because the binaries of different Catalyst version are not compatible. Choose the Catalyst* folder according to your Catalyst driver version. If you have Catalyst 14.6 or 14.7 installed, then use the files in the Catalyst 14.9 folder.
EDIT 2: I fixed the README. I used the UNIX newline instead of the Windows newline
-
@ NaN
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=896133.msg10397793#msg10397793
Not sure what binaries you are referring to that goes in the binary folder.
I just created the bat and ran it from the unzip.
You have to copy the gpuhash_* files of one Catalyst* folder into the binaries folder because the binaries of different Catalyst version are not compatible. Choose the Catalyst* folder according to your Catalyst driver version. If you have Catalyst 14.6 or 14.7 installed, then use the files in the Catalyst 14.9 folder.
EDIT 2: I fixed the README. I used the UNIX newline instead of the Windows newline
Thanks Nan.
I just figured out I had to -u username:password instead of the -u username -p password.
Up and running now.
Huge speed up from the 0.2.2 I was using.
Windows 7 64 bit with driver 14.9 getting 4,879 c/m as it was 3,000 c/m before.
-
That are the settings for clpts v2.0, that gave the best results for my rig:
- -g 2 -a 0 for R9 280X
- -g 3 -a 2 for R9 290 and Windows
- -g 3 -a 4 for R9 290 and Linux
-
That are the settings for clpts v2.0, that gave the best results for my rig:
- -g 2 -a 0 for R9 280X
- -g 3 -a 2 for R9 290 and Windows
- -g 3 -a 4 for R9 290 and Linux
This took me from 4,879 to 6,099 c/m.
Will try it out for giggles on an Nvidia 970 later (not sure if it will run but will try).
EDIT: Tried for the GTX 970 just to see but would not run. Says no Open CL device found. Kinda weird because some AMD miners still pick it up and some don't.
-
That are the settings for clpts v2.0, that gave the best results for my rig:
- -g 2 -a 0 for R9 280X
- -g 3 -a 2 for R9 290 and Windows
- -g 3 -a 4 for R9 290 and Linux
This took me from 4,879 to 6,099 c/m.
Will try it out for giggles on an Nvidia 970 later (not sure if it will run but will try).
EDIT: Tried for the GTX 970 just to see but would not run. Says no Open CL device found. Kinda weird because some AMD miners still pick it up and some don't.
Nvidia is not supported because I'm using AMD specific instructions and I don't know whether Nvidia supports SPIR (I don't think so). I did run my miner on a Nvidia GPU once, but it wasn't really fast and other miners were comparable. I don't own a Nvidia GPU, so I could not really test it, but perhaps the miner could run well on GTX 970 and later.