<<  >> (p.158)
    Author Topic: [ANN] dstm's ZCash Equihash Nvidia Miner v0.6.2 (Linux Windows)  (Read 225288 times)

    • dodgertc
    Newbie
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 29
    Merit: 0


    View Profile
    May 15, 2018, 07:17:36 AM
    Last edit: May 15, 2018, 07:30:24 AM by dodgertc
     #3141
    Quote from: simbav on May 14, 2018, 11:07:54 PM
    Quote from: subzverb on May 14, 2018, 08:45:33 PM
    very buggy release. i am using hiveos. dstm 0.6.1.

    1. gtx1080ti has hashrate around 200 sols
    2. ping problem (already reported here before)

    Same problem here... With gtx 1060, dstm 0.6.0 i get ~300 sol/s. Now with dstm 0.6.1 i get around 200 sol/s .
    Whats wrong?
    https://i.imgur.com/UKFqQvW.png

    yes i can confirm that.

    are those AMD machines ? i have the same effect on 2 other of these cheap AMD machines, but on the modern intel machine with gigabyte D3A H110 it has no issues and the 0.6.1 performs slightly better.

    this is with 0.6 (and its even warm).
    Code:
    GPU1 56C Sol/s: 491.0 Sol/W: 4.33 Avg: 487.8 I/s: 261.2 Sh: 0.39 0.99 116
    GPU0 60C Sol/s: 710.1 Sol/W: 3.58 Avg: 715.4 I/s: 383.2 Sh: 0.58 1.00 112
    GPU3 60C Sol/s: 489.1 Sol/W: 4.33 Avg: 487.8 I/s: 261.2 Sh: 0.40 1.00 113
    GPU2 52C Sol/s: 493.4 Sol/W: 4.36 Avg: 490.8 I/s: 262.8 Sh: 0.43 0.99 112
    GPU4 61C Sol/s: 740.6 Sol/W: 3.68 Avg: 732.8 I/s: 392.4 Sh: 0.63 0.99 112
    ========== Sol/s: 2924.2 Sol/W: 4.06 Avg: 2914.7 I/s: 1560.8 Sh: 2.41 0.99 113

    this is with 0.6.1 just started (so would get lower in a bit)
    Code:
    _ GPU0 58C 80% | 678.2 Sol/s 678.2 Avg 364.9 I/s | 3.44 S/W 202 W | 0.00 . .
    _ GPU1 55C 80% | 474.4 Sol/s 474.4 Avg 254.7 I/s | 4.22 S/W 117 W | 0.00 . .
    _ GPU2 50C 80% | 476.2 Sol/s 476.2 Avg 253.9 I/s | 4.31 S/W 104 W | 0.00 . .
    _ GPU3 58C 80% | 462.7 Sol/s 462.7 Avg 249.3 I/s | 4.15 S/W 110 W | 0.00 . .
    _ GPU4 58C 80% | 747.1 Sol/s 747.1 Avg 402.5 I/s | 3.78 S/W 179 W | 2.99 100 113
    ============== | 2838.7 Sol/s 2838.7 Avg 1525.3 I/s | 3.98 S/W 713 W | 2.99 100 113


    hwinfo:  (its obviously one of my low ROI machines where i use an older downclocked energy save cpu, mb + mem in combination with a 1to4 pci extender. works flawlessly though. its 2x 1080ti 3x1070ti config. OS is SmOS.

    Code:
    Linux simpleminer 4.11.12-041112-generic #201707210350 SMP Fri Jul 21 07:53:15 UTC 2017 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

    Code:

    Architecture:          x86_64
    CPU op-mode(s):        32-bit, 64-bit
    Byte Order:            Little Endian
    CPU(s):                4
    On-line CPU(s) list:   0-3
    Thread(s) per core:    2
    Core(s) per socket:    2
    Socket(s):             1
    NUMA node(s):          1
    Vendor ID:             AuthenticAMD
    CPU family:            21
    Model:                 48
    Model name:            AMD A8-7600 Radeon R7, 10 Compute Cores 4C+6G
    Stepping:              1
    CPU MHz:               1400.000
    CPU max MHz:           2800.0000
    CPU min MHz:           1400.0000
    BogoMIPS:              4990.45
    Virtualization:        AMD-V
    L1d cache:             16K
    L1i cache:             96K
    L2 cache:              2048K
    NUMA node0 CPU(s):     0-3

    cheers

  • oberrz
    Newbie
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 20
    Merit: 0


    View Profile
    May 15, 2018, 04:32:29 PM
     #3142
    How to use intensity ?? Could you give more detailed manual ?

  • blackjec
    Newbie
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 20
    Merit: 0


    View Profile
    May 15, 2018, 05:08:49 PM
     #3143
    Quote from: dstm on May 14, 2018, 01:16:06 PM
    Quote from: blackjec on May 14, 2018, 06:39:07 AM
    Quote from: dstm on May 12, 2018, 07:05:22 PM
    New Version 0.6.1
    ...
    - improve performance on linux systems by ~2%

    You apply 2 queue per GPU, right? Make please option for switch between old/new modes for selected card. For example - like "dev=0,1,2" for old mode and "dev=0,0,1,2,2" for new mode (card 0 and 2 - 2 thread/GPU, card 1 - 1 thread/GPU)

    Also, with v6.1:
    gtx750 - SM5.0 - same performance, +1..2 sols/sec
    gtx950 - SM5.2 - yes, +2% faster
    gtx1050ti - SM6.1 - 1-2% SLOWER  Shocked

    Rollback to v6.0  Sad

    Thx for reporting performance measurements.

    +1-2 Sol/s on an gtx750 are about +2%.

    gtx1050ti sm6.1: There is nothing special about sm6.1 in respect to this optimization. That's not what I'm getting.

    Could you pls provide the log files of your tests?
    A run of 5min (for 0.6/0.6.1) should be enough on a previously cooled down system.

    Sorry, I was wrong. I retest again (some hours) and get next average values:

    gtx750       67   ->  67
    gtx950      153  ->  155     ~1.5%
    gtx1050ti  191  ->  192
    total          412 ->  415

  • chrysophylax
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 3122
    Merit: 1093


    --- ChainWorks Industries ---


    View Profile WWW
    May 15, 2018, 06:09:13 PM
     #3144
    Seems to hash reasonably well ...

    Will try out the Linux version shortly.

    #crysx
    CWI-Thread (theFORUM) - https://bt.irlbtc.com/view/1563601 . CWI-WebSite (theSITE) - https://chainworksindustries.com/ . CWI-Shop (theSHOP) - https://chainworksindustries.com/theSHOP.html .

  • Biggen1
    Newbie
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 64
    Merit: 0


    View Profile
    May 16, 2018, 12:32:50 AM
     #3145
    Looking good so far on Ubuntu Server 16.04.  I am seeing the slight performance bump.  Keep up the good work.  Been running your miner since December and have NEVER had a crash.  I only shut down to apply patches once a month and I'm back up and running within 10 minutes after that.

    Code:
       GPU0  64C  37% |  515.6 Sol/s   511.3 Avg   273.9 I/s | 3.94 S/W  128 W |  0.21  100  176
       GPU1  61C  34% |  491.3 Sol/s   503.8 Avg   266.4 I/s | 3.90 S/W  134 W |  0.21  100  171
       GPU2  61C  34% |  507.7 Sol/s   506.5 Avg   271.0 I/s | 3.92 S/W  130 W |  0.00     . .
       GPU3  55C  27% |  499.5 Sol/s   503.7 Avg   270.0 I/s | 3.91 S/W  125 W |  0.64  100  176
       GPU4  63C  36% |  509.4 Sol/s   506.4 Avg   270.9 I/s | 3.91 S/W  129 W |  0.21  100  177
       GPU5  62C  35% |  510.1 Sol/s   511.6 Avg   272.7 I/s | 3.96 S/W  131 W |  0.43  100  176
       GPU6  62C  34% |  503.2 Sol/s   506.3 Avg   270.9 I/s | 3.92 S/W  127 W |  0.43  100  176
       GPU7  59C  31% |  514.1 Sol/s   508.1 Avg   272.9 I/s | 3.93 S/W  133 W |  0.64  100  173
       ============== | 4050.8 Sol/s  4057.8 Avg  2168.8 I/s | 3.93 S/W 1039 W |  2.78  100  175

  • oliverlj
    Newbie
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 4
    Merit: 0


    View Profile
    May 16, 2018, 06:33:54 AM
     #3146
    I have performance issue on 0.6.1 as well :

    0.6.0 :

    Code:
    2018-05-16 08:29:40|   GPU2  55C  Sol/s: 433.5  Sol/W: 3.65  Avg: 437.7  I/s: 236.2  Sh: 0.90   1.00 71 
    2018-05-16 08:29:40|   GPU0  52C  Sol/s: 453.7  Sol/W: 3.77  Avg: 449.3  I/s: 237.7  Sh: 1.50   1.00 71  +
    2018-05-16 08:29:41|   GPU1  49C  Sol/s: 445.0  Sol/W: 3.69  Avg: 441.4  I/s: 237.4  Sh: 2.39   1.00 71  ++
    2018-05-16 08:29:42|   GPU3  45C  Sol/s: 452.8  Sol/W: 3.71  Avg: 445.3  I/s: 238.6  Sh: 1.19   1.00 71 
    2018-05-16 08:29:43|   GPU4  50C  Sol/s: 471.4  Sol/W: 3.87  Avg: 462.9  I/s: 248.3  Sh: 3.28   1.00 72 
    2018-05-16 08:29:45|   GPU5  51C  Sol/s: 466.2  Sol/W: 3.89  Avg: 464.1  I/s: 247.8  Sh: 2.39   1.00 71  +
    2018-05-16 08:29:47|   GPU6  48C  Sol/s: 461.2  Sol/W: 3.87  Avg: 461.4  I/s: 245.9  Sh: 2.09   1.00 71  +
    2018-05-16 08:29:47|   ========== Sol/s: 3183.7 Sol/W: 3.78  Avg: 3162.2 I/s: 1691.9 Sh: 13.74  1.00 71

    0.6.1 :

    Code:
    2018-05-16 08:32:46|   GPU0  50C  50% |  206.1 Sol/s   211.9 Avg   110.3 I/s | 2.01 S/W  107 W |  0.00     . .
    2018-05-16 08:32:46|   GPU1  48C  50% |  417.7 Sol/s   422.9 Avg   226.7 I/s | 3.51 S/W  121 W |  1.71  100  71
    2018-05-16 08:32:46|   GPU2  47C  50% |  162.1 Sol/s   171.1 Avg    89.3 I/s | 1.73 S/W   93 W |  1.29  100  72
    2018-05-16 08:32:46|   GPU3  44C  50% |  431.6 Sol/s   429.5 Avg   227.9 I/s | 3.56 S/W  122 W |  3.41  100  278 ++
    2018-05-16 08:32:46|   GPU4  44C  50% |  158.6 Sol/s   159.4 Avg    82.8 I/s | 1.80 S/W   83 W |  0.48  100  71
    2018-05-16 08:32:46|   GPU5  50C  50% |  437.5 Sol/s   440.9 Avg   234.4 I/s | 3.66 S/W  120 W |  2.34  100  71 +
    2018-05-16 08:32:47|   GPU6  44C  50% |  198.9 Sol/s   204.0 Avg   107.9 I/s | 1.93 S/W  111 W |  1.70  100  70
    2018-05-16 08:32:47|   ============== | 2012.5 Sol/s  2039.8 Avg  1079.3 I/s | 2.60 S/W  760 W | 10.93  100  105

    the config is 7 * msi gaming 1070 on ubuntu 18.04, nvidia drive 390.48

  • Morbias
    Newbie
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 23
    Merit: 0


    View Profile
    May 16, 2018, 08:43:15 AM
     #3147
    Quote from: oliverlj on May 16, 2018, 06:33:54 AM
    I have performance issue on 0.6.1 as well :

    0.6.0 :

    Code:
    2018-05-16 08:29:40|   GPU2  55C  Sol/s: 433.5  Sol/W: 3.65  Avg: 437.7  I/s: 236.2  Sh: 0.90   1.00 71 
    2018-05-16 08:29:40|   GPU0  52C  Sol/s: 453.7  Sol/W: 3.77  Avg: 449.3  I/s: 237.7  Sh: 1.50   1.00 71  +
    2018-05-16 08:29:41|   GPU1  49C  Sol/s: 445.0  Sol/W: 3.69  Avg: 441.4  I/s: 237.4  Sh: 2.39   1.00 71  ++
    2018-05-16 08:29:42|   GPU3  45C  Sol/s: 452.8  Sol/W: 3.71  Avg: 445.3  I/s: 238.6  Sh: 1.19   1.00 71 
    2018-05-16 08:29:43|   GPU4  50C  Sol/s: 471.4  Sol/W: 3.87  Avg: 462.9  I/s: 248.3  Sh: 3.28   1.00 72 
    2018-05-16 08:29:45|   GPU5  51C  Sol/s: 466.2  Sol/W: 3.89  Avg: 464.1  I/s: 247.8  Sh: 2.39   1.00 71  +
    2018-05-16 08:29:47|   GPU6  48C  Sol/s: 461.2  Sol/W: 3.87  Avg: 461.4  I/s: 245.9  Sh: 2.09   1.00 71  +
    2018-05-16 08:29:47|   ========== Sol/s: 3183.7 Sol/W: 3.78  Avg: 3162.2 I/s: 1691.9 Sh: 13.74  1.00 71

    0.6.1 :

    Code:
    2018-05-16 08:32:46|   GPU0  50C  50% |  206.1 Sol/s   211.9 Avg   110.3 I/s | 2.01 S/W  107 W |  0.00     . .
    2018-05-16 08:32:46|   GPU1  48C  50% |  417.7 Sol/s   422.9 Avg   226.7 I/s | 3.51 S/W  121 W |  1.71  100  71
    2018-05-16 08:32:46|   GPU2  47C  50% |  162.1 Sol/s   171.1 Avg    89.3 I/s | 1.73 S/W   93 W |  1.29  100  72
    2018-05-16 08:32:46|   GPU3  44C  50% |  431.6 Sol/s   429.5 Avg   227.9 I/s | 3.56 S/W  122 W |  3.41  100  278 ++
    2018-05-16 08:32:46|   GPU4  44C  50% |  158.6 Sol/s   159.4 Avg    82.8 I/s | 1.80 S/W   83 W |  0.48  100  71
    2018-05-16 08:32:46|   GPU5  50C  50% |  437.5 Sol/s   440.9 Avg   234.4 I/s | 3.66 S/W  120 W |  2.34  100  71 +
    2018-05-16 08:32:47|   GPU6  44C  50% |  198.9 Sol/s   204.0 Avg   107.9 I/s | 1.93 S/W  111 W |  1.70  100  70
    2018-05-16 08:32:47|   ============== | 2012.5 Sol/s  2039.8 Avg  1079.3 I/s | 2.60 S/W  760 W | 10.93  100  105

    the config is 7 * msi gaming 1070 on ubuntu 18.04, nvidia drive 390.48


    I have the same in few rigs, 8x1070 EVGA

  • xyburcoin
    Full Member
    ***
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 210
    Merit: 100


    View Profile
    May 16, 2018, 12:56:43 PM
     #3148
    Quote from: joinjoohny on May 16, 2018, 12:52:02 PM
    Thank you guys!
    Very good result for my rig 6x 1070ti

    Equihash algoritm:
    Average rate - 3.38 KSol/s
    Energy per card - Sol/w 4.20

    nice results... how did you do that? care to share your config? Thanks.
    Life is ours, we live it our way.

  • dstm (OP)
    Full Member
    ***
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 350
    Merit: 126


    View Profile
    May 16, 2018, 01:06:37 PM
     #3149
    Quote from: anotherwave on May 15, 2018, 12:11:56 AM
    So i get a strange thing happening in 6.1.  I have two 1080ti's on my comp and when i run my second card by itself the output shows only the first line of hash info and then stops displaying any info except for difficulty changes.  The card is hashing and is reporting on the pool but the output display just shows the difficulty changes. If i run my first card by itself and if i run the two cards together they output fine just how they are suppose to.. Must be a little glitch with running dev 1 only i guess. Anyone else running into this?   Great miner by the way..  https://imgur.com/a/BP5ulKB

    Thx, fixed.

  • dstm (OP)
    Full Member
    ***
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 350
    Merit: 126


    View Profile
    May 16, 2018, 01:07:25 PM
     #3150
    For people having performance issues on 0.6.1/linux.
    Is there a significant CPU-load difference between 0.6 0.6.1 on your systems?

  • chaostic
    Newbie
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 22
    Merit: 2


    View Profile
    May 16, 2018, 06:38:18 PM
     #3151
    Quote from: joinjoohny on May 16, 2018, 12:52:02 PM
    Thank you guys!
    Very good result for my rig 6x 1070ti

    Equihash algoritm:
    Average rate - 3.38 KSol/s
    Energy per card - Sol/w 4.20


    to get 4 souls/watt on a 1070 ti, means you have the TPD about 58-60% lol you should post you're config cause I just dont see that type of hash rate with that low of TPD.

  • HashAuger
    Newbie
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 481
    Merit: 0


    View Profile WWW
    May 16, 2018, 07:03:05 PM
     #3152
    Quote from: dstm on May 12, 2018, 07:05:22 PM
    New Version 0.6.1
    - support configuration of 'temp-target', 'intensity', 'pool' via cmd-line parameters

    DSTM, thanks for the new version.  I haven't had any issues with latency on MiningPoolHub, ZPool or NiceHash using Windows 10. However, I do have a quick question regarding latency.  Is 1.0  the default value?  Based on my limited testing, I am assuming it is as any lower value reduces the hash rate, but I would like a quick confirmation of that. Thanks.

  • wi7chking
    Newbie
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 2
    Merit: 0


    View Profile
    May 16, 2018, 07:31:15 PM
     #3153
    Quote from: dstm on May 16, 2018, 01:07:25 PM
    For people having performance issues on 0.6.1/linux.
    Is there a significant CPU-load difference between 0.6 0.6.1 on your systems?

    Hi DSTM,

    I noticed quite a difference in CPU usage between 0.6.0 and 0.6.1 running on vanilla Debian 9.4 (Stretch).
    Here it goes: https://imgur.com/a/lNtcqlC

    I measured the CPU usages with top over a period of time (around 1 minute or so) and took the average.
    The behaviour of 0.6.1 running on my miner is that the last GPU (GPU4) is running at 75% of its capacity.
    This rig has 4 GTX 1070 and 1 GTX 1080.  One of the 1070s is GPU4.
    That's quite odd (considering the high CPU usage of kworker and some IRQs as well with 0.6.1).
    GPU Overclock, memory clock, power limit have been kept identical in the two runs (0.6.0 vs 0.6.1).
    The only actual difference is zm executable version.

    Hope it helps.  Meanwhile, I reverted to 0.6.0 that uses less CPU and provides a higher combined hashrate on my rig.

    Thanks for your good work! Cheers!

  • dstm (OP)
    Full Member
    ***
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 350
    Merit: 126


    View Profile
    May 16, 2018, 08:00:34 PM
     #3154
    Quote from: HashAuger on May 16, 2018, 07:03:05 PM
    Quote from: dstm on May 12, 2018, 07:05:22 PM
    New Version 0.6.1
    - support configuration of 'temp-target', 'intensity', 'pool' via cmd-line parameters

    DSTM, thanks for the new version.  I haven't had any issues with latency on MiningPoolHub, ZPool or NiceHash using Windows 10. However, I do have a quick question regarding latency.  Is 1.0  the default value?  Based on my limited testing, I am assuming it is as any lower value reduces the hash rate, but I would like a quick confirmation of that. Thanks.

    I guess you're talking about intensity not latency like you wrote.
    Intensity is only used to reduce the GPU load - if you don't set the '--intensity' option the intensity code path isn't used and zm will run as fast as possible.

  • dstm (OP)
    Full Member
    ***
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 350
    Merit: 126


    View Profile
    May 16, 2018, 08:01:04 PM
     #3155
    Quote from: wi7chking on May 16, 2018, 07:31:15 PM
    Quote from: dstm on May 16, 2018, 01:07:25 PM
    For people having performance issues on 0.6.1/linux.
    Is there a significant CPU-load difference between 0.6 0.6.1 on your systems?

    Hi DSTM,

    I noticed quite a difference in CPU usage between 0.6.0 and 0.6.1 running on vanilla Debian 9.4 (Stretch).
    Here it goes: https://imgur.com/a/lNtcqlC

    I measured the CPU usages with top over a period of time (around 1 minute or so) and took the average.
    The behaviour of 0.6.1 running on my miner is that the last GPU (GPU4) is running at 75% of its capacity.
    This rig has 4 GTX 1070 and 1 GTX 1080.  One of the 1070s is GPU4.
    That's quite odd (considering the high CPU usage of kworker and some IRQs as well with 0.6.1).
    GPU Overclock, memory clock, power limit have been kept identical in the two runs (0.6.0 vs 0.6.1).
    The only actual difference is zm executable version.

    Hope it helps.  Meanwhile, I reverted to 0.6.0 that uses less CPU and provides a higher combined hashrate on my rig.

    Thanks for your good work! Cheers!

    Thx, that's very helpful.

    For people who have performance issues and also have some time to test - pls pm me.

  • Keko Fdez
    Jr. Member
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 108
    Merit: 7


    View Profile
    May 16, 2018, 10:37:38 PM
     #3156
    Quote from: chaostic on May 16, 2018, 06:38:18 PM
    Quote from: joinjoohny on May 16, 2018, 12:52:02 PM
    Thank you guys!
    Very good result for my rig 6x 1070ti

    Equihash algoritm:
    Average rate - 3.38 KSol/s
    Energy per card - Sol/w 4.20


    to get 4 souls/watt on a 1070 ti, means you have the TPD about 58-60% lol you should post you're config cause I just dont see that type of hash rate with that low of TPD.

    That is actually not true. I have 6 GTX 1070 Ti and get 4.12 sols/W average between the 6 cards and all of them are running at 70% TDP. The best one it is doing 4.23 sols/W. Have a look




    No need to go that low but still I am surprise about the performance difference on the hashrate. I average 3107 maximun 3111 and he is doing 200 more sols average. Are you using Windows or Linux? and what driver version?

  • Keko Fdez
    Jr. Member
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 108
    Merit: 7


    View Profile
    May 16, 2018, 10:43:59 PM
     #3157
    Quote from: xyburcoin on May 16, 2018, 12:56:43 PM
    Quote from: joinjoohny on May 16, 2018, 12:52:02 PM
    Thank you guys!
    Very good result for my rig 6x 1070ti

    Equihash algoritm:
    Average rate - 3.38 KSol/s
    Energy per card - Sol/w 4.20

    nice results... how did you do that? care to share your config? Thanks.

    I am sorry but 4 post and results nobody is near them with the same cards on different systems. I think you should upload a pic otherwise I just think you are pretty much bluffing...

    I have not seen anyone getting that high hashrate and sols/W with GTX 1070 Ti. That combination does not sound right to me

  • HashAuger
    Newbie
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 481
    Merit: 0


    View Profile WWW
    May 17, 2018, 12:04:59 AM
     #3158
    Quote from: dstm on May 16, 2018, 08:00:34 PM
    Quote from: HashAuger on May 16, 2018, 07:03:05 PM
    Quote from: dstm on May 12, 2018, 07:05:22 PM
    New Version 0.6.1
    - support configuration of 'temp-target', 'intensity', 'pool' via cmd-line parameters

    DSTM, thanks for the new version.  I haven't had any issues with latency on MiningPoolHub, ZPool or NiceHash using Windows 10. However, I do have a quick question regarding latency.  Is 1.0  the default value?  Based on my limited testing, I am assuming it is as any lower value reduces the hash rate, but I would like a quick confirmation of that. Thanks.

    I guess you're talking about intensity not latency like you wrote.
    Intensity is only used to reduce the GPU load - if you don't set the '--intensity' option the intensity code path isn't used and zm will run as fast as possible.

    Sorry about my typo. Yes, I meant intensity and not latency in the second sentence. That’s what I get for not proof-reading.  Thanks for clarifying how your miner uses intensity. Other miners, such as CCMiner, use a default intensity that is often less than the maximum and I wanted to make sure that was not the case with DSTM. Keep up the good work.

  • Slukeass
    Newbie
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 2
    Merit: 0


    View Profile
    May 17, 2018, 01:41:27 AM
     #3159
    Quote from: subzverb on May 14, 2018, 08:45:33 PM
    very buggy release. i am using hiveos. dstm 0.6.1.

    1. gtx1080ti has hashrate around 200 sols
    2. ping problem (already reported here before)
    I would have to agree. Both of my rugs dropped 500 sols after jumping onto DSTM 0.6.1. I rolled back to 0.6 and my hash rates jumped up where they should be. I only have one rig near me but it’s not by a tv so I’m not sure how I can get the logs if you need them.

  • dodgertc
    Newbie
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 29
    Merit: 0


    View Profile
    May 17, 2018, 08:07:35 AM
     #3160
    Quote from: dodgertc on May 15, 2018, 07:17:36 AM
    Quote from: simbav on May 14, 2018, 11:07:54 PM
    Quote from: subzverb on May 14, 2018, 08:45:33 PM
    very buggy release. i am using hiveos. dstm 0.6.1.

    1. gtx1080ti has hashrate around 200 sols
    2. ping problem (already reported here before)

    Same problem here... With gtx 1060, dstm 0.6.0 i get ~300 sol/s. Now with dstm 0.6.1 i get around 200 sol/s .
    Whats wrong?
    https://i.imgur.com/UKFqQvW.png

    yes i can confirm that.

    are those AMD machines ? i have the same effect on 2 other of these cheap AMD machines, but on the modern intel machine with gigabyte D3A H110 it has no issues and the 0.6.1 performs slightly better.

    this is with 0.6 (and its even warm).
    Code:
    GPU1 56C Sol/s: 491.0 Sol/W: 4.33 Avg: 487.8 I/s: 261.2 Sh: 0.39 0.99 116
    GPU0 60C Sol/s: 710.1 Sol/W: 3.58 Avg: 715.4 I/s: 383.2 Sh: 0.58 1.00 112
    GPU3 60C Sol/s: 489.1 Sol/W: 4.33 Avg: 487.8 I/s: 261.2 Sh: 0.40 1.00 113
    GPU2 52C Sol/s: 493.4 Sol/W: 4.36 Avg: 490.8 I/s: 262.8 Sh: 0.43 0.99 112
    GPU4 61C Sol/s: 740.6 Sol/W: 3.68 Avg: 732.8 I/s: 392.4 Sh: 0.63 0.99 112
    ========== Sol/s: 2924.2 Sol/W: 4.06 Avg: 2914.7 I/s: 1560.8 Sh: 2.41 0.99 113

    this is with 0.6.1 just started (so would get lower in a bit)
    Code:
    _ GPU0 58C 80% | 678.2 Sol/s 678.2 Avg 364.9 I/s | 3.44 S/W 202 W | 0.00 . .
    _ GPU1 55C 80% | 474.4 Sol/s 474.4 Avg 254.7 I/s | 4.22 S/W 117 W | 0.00 . .
    _ GPU2 50C 80% | 476.2 Sol/s 476.2 Avg 253.9 I/s | 4.31 S/W 104 W | 0.00 . .
    _ GPU3 58C 80% | 462.7 Sol/s 462.7 Avg 249.3 I/s | 4.15 S/W 110 W | 0.00 . .
    _ GPU4 58C 80% | 747.1 Sol/s 747.1 Avg 402.5 I/s | 3.78 S/W 179 W | 2.99 100 113
    ============== | 2838.7 Sol/s 2838.7 Avg 1525.3 I/s | 3.98 S/W 713 W | 2.99 100 113


    hwinfo:  (its obviously one of my low ROI machines where i use an older downclocked energy save cpu, mb + mem in combination with a 1to4 pci extender. works flawlessly though. its 2x 1080ti 3x1070ti config. OS is SmOS.

    Code:
    Linux simpleminer 4.11.12-041112-generic #201707210350 SMP Fri Jul 21 07:53:15 UTC 2017 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux

    Code:

    Architecture:          x86_64
    CPU op-mode(s):        32-bit, 64-bit
    Byte Order:            Little Endian
    CPU(s):                4
    On-line CPU(s) list:   0-3
    Thread(s) per core:    2
    Core(s) per socket:    2
    Socket(s):             1
    NUMA node(s):          1
    Vendor ID:             AuthenticAMD
    CPU family:            21
    Model:                 48
    Model name:            AMD A8-7600 Radeon R7, 10 Compute Cores 4C+6G
    Stepping:              1
    CPU MHz:               1400.000
    CPU max MHz:           2800.0000
    CPU min MHz:           1400.0000
    BogoMIPS:              4990.45
    Virtualization:        AMD-V
    L1d cache:             16K
    L1i cache:             96K
    L2 cache:              2048K
    NUMA node0 CPU(s):     0-3

    cheers

    as inquired the cpu usage of 0.6 and 0.6.1 related to above findings.
    0.6.1 has higher peaks ie i see it peak to up to 50% cpu usage at least using "top".

    0.6
    Code:
    Tasks: 162 total,   2 running, 160 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
    %Cpu(s):  8.4 us, 10.5 sy,  0.0 ni, 81.0 id,  0.0 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.1 si,  0.0 st
    KiB Mem :  3963096 total,  2444388 free,  1108500 used,   410208 buff/cache
    KiB Swap:        0 total,        0 free,        0 used.  2497384 avail Mem

      PID USER      PR  NI    VIRT    RES    SHR S  %CPU %MEM     TIME+ COMMAND
     4087 miner     20   0 64.963g 588996 434516 S  40.2 14.9   1155:28 zm

    0.6.1
    Code:
    Tasks: 169 total,   2 running, 167 sleeping,   0 stopped,   0 zombie
    %Cpu(s):  9.8 us, 22.1 sy,  0.0 ni, 68.1 id,  0.0 wa,  0.0 hi,  0.1 si,  0.0 st
    KiB Mem :  3963096 total,  2464964 free,  1085700 used,   412432 buff/cache
    KiB Swap:        0 total,        0 free,        0 used.  2519828 avail Mem

      PID USER      PR  NI    VIRT    RES    SHR S  %CPU %MEM     TIME+ COMMAND
    14325 miner     20   0 67.005g 567988 434928 S  40.5 14.3   0:31.95 zm
    Pages: « 1 ... 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 [158] 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 »
      Print  
Page 157
Viewing Page: 158

IRLBTC™ © 2025 IRLBTC.com