AMD OpenCL Momentum miner

[Mr305]

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

[drr0ss]

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....

[Mario24]

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.

[Mario24]

if it is on the pci bus, then we must increase but only from 100 to 110 Mhz and get 10% more performance

[Ykw]

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.. =)

[drr0ss]

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

[Ykw]

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"...

[drr0ss]

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

[Ykw]

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...  =)

[JoeyD]

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.

[Ykw]

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 =)

[JoeyD]

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.

[Ykw]

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

[Mario24]

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)

[Ykw]

[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.