BitShares Forum
Other => Graveyard => BitShares PTS => Topic started by: Aber on January 12, 2014, 07:47:23 pm
-
There are few in a wild, so maybe we will make a comparsion of them to use best one?
Results
1gh v1.2 - ubuntu 13.04 - 280x (1100/1500) ~1070 cpm
1gh v1.2 - windows 8 64 bit - 7970 3gb (1040/1500) ~1120 cpm
1gh v1.2 - ubuntu x64 - GTX 570 ~960+ cpm
1gh v1.2 - ubuntu x64 - GTX 560Ti ~660+ cpm
1gh v1.2 - AWS g2.2xlarge ~687cpm
cudapts v2014-01-12 - linux - GTX690 (stock clock settings) ~1780 cpm
PtsGPUz0.2ab.exe - windows 8 64 bit - GTX 570 ~830 cpm
-
1gh v1.2 - windows 8 64 bit. sapphire 7970 ghz edition 3gb, 1040 core 1500 ram clock speed. ~1120 CPM
-
1gh v1.2 - windows 8 64 bit. sapphire 7970 ghz edition 3gb, 1040 core 1500 ram clock speed. ~1120 CPM
Just for fun:
cudapts (linux) v2014-01-12 GTX690, stock clock settings, 1780 c/m.
-
1gh v1.2 - windows 8 64 bit. sapphire 7970 ghz edition 3gb, 1040 core 1500 ram clock speed. ~1120 CPM
Just for fun:
cudapts (linux) v2014-01-12 GTX690, stock clock settings, 1780 c/m.
yeah your core from what i've seen with the nvidia results seems to possibly be faster, i'll be curious to see when someone finally implements openCL in more than a benchmarking tool
-
Wow :) but 690 is like 2x680?
-
1gh v1.2 - windows 8 64 bit. sapphire 7970 ghz edition 3gb, 1040 core 1500 ram clock speed. ~1120 CPM
Just for fun:
cudapts (linux) v2014-01-12 GTX690, stock clock settings, 1780 c/m.
Do you mind to try 1gh miner on this one? That would give a general idea how much OpenCL is inferior to CUDA.
-
1gh v1.2 - windows 8 64 bit. sapphire 7970 ghz edition 3gb, 1040 core 1500 ram clock speed. ~1120 CPM
Just for fun:
cudapts (linux) v2014-01-12 GTX690, stock clock settings, 1780 c/m.
Do you mind to try 1gh miner on this one? That would give a general idea how much OpenCL is inferior to CUDA.
Unfortunately, that machine also has one of my coin wallets on it, and I don't run untrusted binaries on it. :(
(Mind you, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the 1gh miner - but there's been a lot of malware floating around.)
-
1gh v1.2 - windows 8 64 bit. sapphire 7970 ghz edition 3gb, 1040 core 1500 ram clock speed. ~1120 CPM
Just for fun:
cudapts (linux) v2014-01-12 GTX690, stock clock settings, 1780 c/m.
Do you mind to try 1gh miner on this one? That would give a general idea how much OpenCL is inferior to CUDA.
Unfortunately, that machine also has one of my coin wallets on it, and I don't run untrusted binaries on it. :(
(Mind you, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the 1gh miner - but there's been a lot of malware floating around.)
But - probably the best case thus far is the EC2 results showing 480 c/m vs about 780. One might expect the same per-core results to extend to the 690, so maybe it would get about 1150? (total SWAG)
-
1gh v1.2 - windows 8 64 bit. sapphire 7970 ghz edition 3gb, 1040 core 1500 ram clock speed. ~1120 CPM
Just for fun:
cudapts (linux) v2014-01-12 GTX690, stock clock settings, 1780 c/m.
Do you mind to try 1gh miner on this one? That would give a general idea how much OpenCL is inferior to CUDA.
Unfortunately, that machine also has one of my coin wallets on it, and I don't run untrusted binaries on it. :(
(Mind you, I'm not saying there's anything wrong with the 1gh miner - but there's been a lot of malware floating around.)
But - probably the best case thus far is the EC2 results showing 480 c/m vs about 780. One might expect the same per-core results to extend to the 690, so maybe it would get about 1150? (total SWAG)
I totally understand your concern about running unknown binaries, yet, maybe there is a way to arrange it securely without much hassle? For example, in VM with mapped PCI device if you are already using such setup for development?
480cpm must be something else, 1gh miner yields 687cpm on g2.2xlarge and I believe there is no more room for optimization (but it is possible that different Nvidia OpenCL compiler versions may produce different results).
-
What is "cudapts"? shrug
I am getting 1750 cpm with gtx 780 +150 core -100 memory on "PtsGPUz0.2ab"
-
What is "cudapts"? shrug
I am getting 1750 cpm with gtx 780 +150 core -100 memory on "PtsGPUz0.2ab"
ptsgpuz0.2ab is a windows port that combines jhprotominer with the GPU core code from cudapts. Your performance should be similar to that achieved by cudapts, at least as of a version or two ago.
-
CPU: I7 3770K
RAM: 16GB DDR3 1600mhz
GTX 570 (no OC)
Windows 8 64
PtsGPUz0.2ab.exe - collisions/min: 830.5174 Shares total: 4301 *
* note these results are while the following CPU miner is running:
Software: yam-yvg1900-M7i-win64-ivy-bridge
Threads:5
PTS Agg. CPM: 269.0;(1024 MB)(AV=9 after AV-optimization)
And the PC is still usable, except for watching movies.
-
And the PC is still usable, except for watching movies.
Use Quick Sync ;)
-
1gh v1.2 - windows 8.1 64 bit - 6950@70 2gb (940/1320) ~1180 cpm
- 7970 3gb (1125/1575) ~1020 cpm
1gh v1.2 - windows 7 64 bit - 6950 1gb (850/1200) ~80 cpm (FFFFFFFFUUUUUUUU)
-
Please update the spreadsheet which I link to from this post:
https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php?topic=2437.0
--with anything I'm missing. I'm not sure whether I'd put any speed tests in it; maybe that could be another spreadsheet?
-
arCUDAMiner v1.0c GTX 560 ti - 540 cpm
arCUDAMiner v1.0c GTX 650 ti - 720 cpm
-
arCUDAminer1.0c is the best :D
Thank you archit
GTX690 = 2150 c/m
(http://img15.hostingpics.net/thumbs/mini_418248IMG3343.jpg) (http://www.hostingpics.net/viewer.php?id=418248IMG3343.jpg)
GTS450 = 253 c/m
(http://img15.hostingpics.net/thumbs/mini_41443420140119103353.jpg) (http://www.hostingpics.net/viewer.php?id=41443420140119103353.jpg)
Quadro 2000 = 204 c/m
(http://img15.hostingpics.net/thumbs/mini_42793420140119104733.jpg) (http://www.hostingpics.net/viewer.php?id=42793420140119104733.jpg)
-
GTX 570
PtsGPUz0.3b - 1030 CPM
arCUDAminer1.0c - 780 CPM
-
2200 cpm on my gtx titan with my SM35 varient of DGAS code with a improved sha512 core.
(https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/33838/sm35.PNG)
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/33838/cudaptswin-0.2-SM35.7z
-
2200 cpm on my gtx titan with my SM35 varient of DGAS code with a improved sha512 core.
three thumbs up.
A good place to admit that I didn't think this optimization would be worth doing (and my naive test of it didn't work), and I was completely wrong. go go open source version. *grin*
-
Tested on Tesla K20c / Xeon E5 2620 / 16GB RAM / Win7 x64:
[miner] [version/options] [cpm]
girino OpenCL jhProtominer gpuv6 480
girino OpenCL jhProtominer gpuv6 -m2048 580
girino OpenCL jhProtominer gpuv4 630
girino OpenCL jhProtominer gpuv4 -m2048 640
girino OpenCL jhProtominer gpuv2 410
cudaptswin-SM35 870
cudaptswin-0.4-exp 1250->1160
arCUDAminer 1.0c avx 1180
arCUDAminer 1.0c cm3 avx 1250->1180
arCUDAminer 1.0c highperf avx 1050
arCUDAminer 1.0c highperf cm3 avx around 1070
PtsGPUz 0.3c lit up my antivirus so disqualified