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.

Quote from: NaN on April 29, 2014, 10:51:11 PM
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

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?

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.

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 =)

Quote from: JoeyD on April 29, 2014, 09:32:42 PM
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...

Normally I'd rather not mess with a running system, but is the upgrade to Catalyst14 really that big of an improvement?

Quote from: Ykw on April 29, 2014, 07:15:45 PM
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

Version 1.2 (NSR) - Catalyst 13 (Windows 7 64bit)

290X (2 thread) - 4550 col/m
270X (1 thread) - 2250 col/m

Ok, I will test it this evening.

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.

Quote from: NaN on April 29, 2014, 01:32:52 PM
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.

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.

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.

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.