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

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: 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

Quote from: NaN on January 30, 2014, 10:33:50 PM
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...

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.

Quote from: visterln on January 30, 2014, 09:34:34 PM

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 ^^

Quote from: duckproto on January 30, 2014, 08:16:42 PM
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?

Quote from: bey on January 30, 2014, 08:54:57 PM

Quote from: NaN on January 30, 2014, 06:10:39 PM
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



and

I used 0.2 and 0.12,7950 too.the same speed,1750 CPM each one

Quote from: NaN on January 30, 2014, 06:10:39 PM
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



and

Quote from: MisO69 on January 30, 2014, 08:30:19 PM

Quote from: duckproto on January 30, 2014, 08:16:42 PM
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.

Quote from: duckproto on January 30, 2014, 08:16:42 PM
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.

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.

on ypool :v0.2

- R280X = 2150 cpm

- hd7950 = 1150 cpm ( version v0.1.2 = 1450 cpm on beer why?? )

nice work anyway !

Thanks a lots! :) Please, support nvidia cards too!!! :'(