<<  >> (p.546)
    Author Topic: OFFICIAL CGMINER mining software thread for linux/win/osx/mips/arm/r-pi 4.11.1  (Read 5806592 times)
    This is a self-moderated topic. If you do not want to be moderated by the person who started this topic, create a new topic. (3 posts by 1+ user deleted.)

    • -ck (OP)
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 4606
    Merit: 1701


    Ruu \o/


    View Profile WWW
    June 12, 2013, 09:21:20 AM
     #10901
    Quote from: Xmansk on June 12, 2013, 08:33:19 AM
    Maybe it is somewhere here in this thread but there are so many posts that i would not find it in a day, so I will just ask.

    Why there is so big difference in rejected ratio in CGMiner mining with intensity 13 and with intensity 20? I am mining DigitalCoin (crypt, 20s block time)
    When i mine with I 13 my rejection ratio is ~0.5% @ 540kh/s per card.
    When i mine with I 20 my rejection ratio is ~7.5% @ 700kh/s per card.

    Why is there so big difference? It is caused by CGMiner, by Pool, by connection, ... ? Is there a way to lower rejection ratio with intensity 20?

    At intensity 20 it takes forever for your GPU to return its results, so by the time it has returned them, fast chain changing altcoins are all onto their next block. This also explains why orphans are extremely common with fast block coins and why ultimately, they're crap since such a system provides no extra actual security (or fast confirmations since you can't trust any confirmations), just more chain fights.
    Developer/maintainer for cgminer, ckpool/ckproxy, and the -ck kernel
    2% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org
    -ck

  • Wisher
    Newbie
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 30
    Merit: 0


    View Profile
    June 12, 2013, 09:26:09 AM
     #10902
    plz, help, how to run the autostart cgminer in ubuntu.

  • Xmansk
    Full Member
    ***
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 163
    Merit: 100


    View Profile
    June 12, 2013, 09:36:42 AM
     #10903
    Quote from: ckolivas on June 12, 2013, 09:21:20 AM
    Quote from: Xmansk on June 12, 2013, 08:33:19 AM
    Maybe it is somewhere here in this thread but there are so many posts that i would not find it in a day, so I will just ask.

    Why there is so big difference in rejected ratio in CGMiner mining with intensity 13 and with intensity 20? I am mining DigitalCoin (crypt, 20s block time)
    When i mine with I 13 my rejection ratio is ~0.5% @ 540kh/s per card.
    When i mine with I 20 my rejection ratio is ~7.5% @ 700kh/s per card.

    Why is there so big difference? It is caused by CGMiner, by Pool, by connection, ... ? Is there a way to lower rejection ratio with intensity 20?

    At intensity 20 it takes forever for your GPU to return its results, so by the time it has returned them, fast chain changing altcoins are all onto their next block. This also explains why orphans are extremely common with fast block coins and why ultimately, they're crap since such a system provides no extra actual security (or fast confirmations since you can't trust any confirmations), just more chain fights.

    And why it takes forever? Why with I 13 it does not take forever? What is different?
    BTC: 13VR6e4XaGGhwq6LMGuFYdQWM5FwVqKSDY
    LTC: LWyrhxuxJk8rVnGaUP98xPhVg445Qka1qr
    DGC: DNgv3ZYpCwQR8spfgwANc8vAExq7danf7W

  • -ck (OP)
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 4606
    Merit: 1701


    Ruu \o/


    View Profile WWW
    June 12, 2013, 09:39:08 AM
     #10904
    Quote from: Xmansk on June 12, 2013, 09:36:42 AM
    Quote from: ckolivas on June 12, 2013, 09:21:20 AM
    Quote from: Xmansk on June 12, 2013, 08:33:19 AM
    Maybe it is somewhere here in this thread but there are so many posts that i would not find it in a day, so I will just ask.

    Why there is so big difference in rejected ratio in CGMiner mining with intensity 13 and with intensity 20? I am mining DigitalCoin (crypt, 20s block time)
    When i mine with I 13 my rejection ratio is ~0.5% @ 540kh/s per card.
    When i mine with I 20 my rejection ratio is ~7.5% @ 700kh/s per card.

    Why is there so big difference? It is caused by CGMiner, by Pool, by connection, ... ? Is there a way to lower rejection ratio with intensity 20?

    At intensity 20 it takes forever for your GPU to return its results, so by the time it has returned them, fast chain changing altcoins are all onto their next block. This also explains why orphans are extremely common with fast block coins and why ultimately, they're crap since such a system provides no extra actual security (or fast confirmations since you can't trust any confirmations), just more chain fights.

    And why it takes forever? Why with I 13 it does not take forever? What is different?
    ...you're turning the intensity up meaning your handing the GPU many many times more work. GPUs take work, work on it for a while and return results at the end, they're nothing like CPUs. Going up in intensity you're giving it many many many times more work (it's an exponential function to intensity).
    Developer/maintainer for cgminer, ckpool/ckproxy, and the -ck kernel
    2% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org
    -ck

  • daemondazz
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 448
    Merit: 250



    View Profile
    June 12, 2013, 10:37:11 AM
     #10905
    Does anything need to be done with 3.1.1 for the USB Erruptor?

    Code:
    root@bitcoin-miner1:~# cgminer -V
    cgminer 3.1.1
    root@bitcoin-miner1:~# uname -a
    Linux bitcoin-miner1 3.2.0-27-generic #43-Ubuntu SMP Fri Jul 6 14:25:57 UTC 2012 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
    root@bitcoin-miner1:~# cgminer -n
     [2013-06-12 20:04:10] CL Platform 0 vendor: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
     [2013-06-12 20:04:10] CL Platform 0 name: AMD Accelerated Parallel Processing
     [2013-06-12 20:04:10] CL Platform 0 version: OpenCL 1.2 AMD-APP (1016.4)
     [2013-06-12 20:04:10] Platform 0 devices: 1
     [2013-06-12 20:04:10]  0       Tahiti
     [2013-06-12 20:04:10] GPU 0 AMD Radeon HD 7900 Series  hardware monitoring enabled
     [2013-06-12 20:04:10] 1 GPU devices max detected
     [2013-06-12 20:04:10] USB all: found 6 devices - listing known devices
     [2013-06-12 20:04:10] No known USB devices
    root@bitcoin-miner1:~# lsdev/ttyUSB0
    /dev/ttyUSB0

    I'm running with

    Code:
    /usr/local/bin/cgminer --auto-fan --auto-gpu --syslog -T --gpu-engine 1100 --gpu-memdiff -150 -I 10 --icarus-options 115200:1:1 --icarus-timing 3.0=80 -o stratum+tcp://cryptominer.org:9332 -u xxxx -p xxxx

    The machine also has a Gigabyte 9750 in it which is merrily hashing away.


    EDIT: Nevermind, I missed the "-Sdev/ttyUSB0" - It appears to be working now.
    Computers, Amateur Radio, Electronics, Aviation - 1dazzrAbMqNu6cUwh2dtYckNygG7jKs8S

  • os2sam
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 3586
    Merit: 1099


    Think for yourself


    View Profile
    June 12, 2013, 10:57:07 AM
     #10906
    When I press Q to quit CGMiner 3.2.1 most of the time it crash's.  Once out of 3 or 4 times does it display the summary when pressing Q.

    Win7 32bit running cgminer-nogpu.
    Thanks,
    Sam
    A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
    Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
    A: Top-posting.
    Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

  • os2sam
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 3586
    Merit: 1099


    Think for yourself


    View Profile
    June 12, 2013, 11:05:59 AM
     #10907
    I'm trying to disable two AMU's, out of 4 total, in each CGMiner session.

    "-d 0 -d 1 --remove-disabled" in the first session works fine.
    "-d 2 -d 3 --remove-disabled" in the second session does not work.

    when I run CGMiner-nogpu -n it says "failed to open, err -3"

    It appears that you intend for CGMiner to be able to do this and I would like to run two sessions for two different pools.
    Thanks,
    Sam
    A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
    Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
    A: Top-posting.
    Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

  • Xmansk
    Full Member
    ***
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 163
    Merit: 100


    View Profile
    June 12, 2013, 11:13:08 AM
     #10908
    Quote from: ckolivas on June 12, 2013, 09:39:08 AM
    Quote from: Xmansk on June 12, 2013, 09:36:42 AM
    And why it takes forever? Why with I 13 it does not take forever? What is different?
    ...you're turning the intensity up meaning your handing the GPU many many times more work. GPUs take work, work on it for a while and return results at the end, they're nothing like CPUs. Going up in intensity you're giving it many many many times more work (it's an exponential function to intensity).

    So basically my higher hashrate at intensity 20 is caused because GPU use all availiabe resources to solve work so it solve more work, but it does not do it faster? If so, I should try to find highest possible hashrate at intensity 13.
    BTC: 13VR6e4XaGGhwq6LMGuFYdQWM5FwVqKSDY
    LTC: LWyrhxuxJk8rVnGaUP98xPhVg445Qka1qr
    DGC: DNgv3ZYpCwQR8spfgwANc8vAExq7danf7W

  • os2sam
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 3586
    Merit: 1099


    Think for yourself


    View Profile
    June 12, 2013, 11:19:30 AM
     #10909
    Quote from: Xmansk on June 12, 2013, 11:13:08 AM
    Quote from: ckolivas on June 12, 2013, 09:39:08 AM
    Quote from: Xmansk on June 12, 2013, 09:36:42 AM
    And why it takes forever? Why with I 13 it does not take forever? What is different?
    ...you're turning the intensity up meaning your handing the GPU many many times more work. GPUs take work, work on it for a while and return results at the end, they're nothing like CPUs. Going up in intensity you're giving it many many many times more work (it's an exponential function to intensity).

    So basically my higher hashrate at intensity 20 is caused because GPU use all availiabe resources to solve work so it solve more work, but it does not do it faster? If so, I should try to find highest possible hashrate at intensity 13.

    You probably should use trial and error find the intensity that gives you the best combination of hash rate, low error rate and best U:/WU:
    A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
    Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
    A: Top-posting.
    Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

  • -ck (OP)
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 4606
    Merit: 1701


    Ruu \o/


    View Profile WWW
    June 12, 2013, 11:26:17 AM
     #10910
    Quote from: os2sam on June 12, 2013, 11:05:59 AM
    I'm trying to disable two AMU's, out of 4 total, in each CGMiner session.

    "-d 0 -d 1 --remove-disabled" in the first session works fine.
    "-d 2 -d 3 --remove-disabled" in the second session does not work.

    when I run CGMiner-nogpu -n it says "failed to open, err -3"

    It appears that you intend for CGMiner to be able to do this and I would like to run two sessions for two different pools.
    Thanks,
    Sam
    The --usb command gives you finer control over this. The --device command only takes one set of values now (-d 0-1 instead of -d 0 -d 1) and only works for usb devices since version 3.2.1, and it is a coarse command.
    Developer/maintainer for cgminer, ckpool/ckproxy, and the -ck kernel
    2% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org
    -ck

  • os2sam
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 3586
    Merit: 1099


    Think for yourself


    View Profile
    June 12, 2013, 11:51:33 AM
     #10911
    Quote from: ckolivas on June 12, 2013, 11:26:17 AM
    Quote from: os2sam on June 12, 2013, 11:05:59 AM
    I'm trying to disable two AMU's, out of 4 total, in each CGMiner session.

    "-d 0 -d 1 --remove-disabled" in the first session works fine.
    "-d 2 -d 3 --remove-disabled" in the second session does not work.

    when I run CGMiner-nogpu -n it says "failed to open, err -3"

    It appears that you intend for CGMiner to be able to do this and I would like to run two sessions for two different pools.
    Thanks,
    Sam
    The --usb command gives you finer control over this. The --device command only takes one set of values now (-d 0-1 instead of -d 0 -d 1) and only works for usb devices since version 3.2.1, and it is a coarse command.

    Ah, in other words RTFM Smiley.  I found the section in the readme and I'll give it a whirl tonight.
    Thanks,
    Sam
    A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
    Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
    A: Top-posting.
    Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

  • os2sam
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 3586
    Merit: 1099


    Think for yourself


    View Profile
    June 12, 2013, 12:01:44 PM
     #10912
    Quote from: ckolivas on June 12, 2013, 11:26:17 AM
    The --usb command gives you finer control over this. The --device command only takes one set of values now (-d 0-1 instead of -d 0 -d 1) and only works for usb devices since version 3.2.1, and it is a coarse command.

    I went ahead and tried it now.

    "--usb 5:1,5:2" in one instance
    "--usb 3:1,3:2" in the other instance

    Both hashing away just fine.  Now I can more objectively compare pools.
    Thanks,
    Sam
    A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
    Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
    A: Top-posting.
    Q: What is the most annoying thing on usenet and in e-mail?

  • Tamis
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 476
    Merit: 250



    View Profile
    June 12, 2013, 01:48:22 PM
     #10913
    Are there any reasons to update from 3.1.1 to 3.2.1 if you are only using gpus ?

  • bitcoindaddy
    Hero Member
    *****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 481
    Merit: 500


    View Profile
    June 12, 2013, 03:16:41 PM
     #10914
    Quote from: os2sam on June 12, 2013, 12:01:44 PM
    Quote from: ckolivas on June 12, 2013, 11:26:17 AM
    The --usb command gives you finer control over this. The --device command only takes one set of values now (-d 0-1 instead of -d 0 -d 1) and only works for usb devices since version 3.2.1, and it is a coarse command.

    I went ahead and tried it now.

    "--usb 5:1,5:2" in one instance
    "--usb 3:1,3:2" in the other instance

    Both hashing away just fine.  Now I can more objectively compare pools.
    Thanks,
    Sam

    Is that all that is necessary to run multiple instances or is there other "secret sauce"?  What do  the number mean?

  • turtle83
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 322
    Merit: 250


    Supersonic


    View Profile WWW
    June 12, 2013, 03:24:06 PM
     #10915
    Quote from: bitcoindaddy on June 12, 2013, 03:16:41 PM
    Quote from: os2sam on June 12, 2013, 12:01:44 PM
    Quote from: ckolivas on June 12, 2013, 11:26:17 AM
    The --usb command gives you finer control over this. The --device command only takes one set of values now (-d 0-1 instead of -d 0 -d 1) and only works for usb devices since version 3.2.1, and it is a coarse command.

    I went ahead and tried it now.

    "--usb 5:1,5:2" in one instance
    "--usb 3:1,3:2" in the other instance

    Both hashing away just fine.  Now I can more objectively compare pools.
    Thanks,
    Sam

    Is that all that is necessary to run multiple instances or is there other "secret sauce"?  What do  the number mean?

    i believe the number is bus:device.

    so "5:1" means device 1 on bus 5. on linux lsusb shows you the bus and device number for each usb device.
    FPGA/ASIC only: Raspberry pi packages for cgminer | Ubuntu PPA for mining related software

  • salfter
    Hero Member
    *****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 651
    Merit: 501


    My PGP Key: 92C7689C


    View Profile WWW
    June 12, 2013, 04:13:01 PM
     #10916
    I went to switch back to Bitcoin mining yesterday on a box that had been mining altcoins with cgminer 3.2.1 (built on an amd64 Gentoo box with a source tarball pulled from https://github.com/ckolivas/cgminer/archive/v3.2.1.tar.gz.  I have these pools configured in cgminer.conf:

    Code:
    "pools" : [
            {
                    "url" : "stratum+tcp://mint.bitminter.com:3333/",
                    "user" : "salfter_lanbox",
                    "pass" : "**redacted**"
            },
            {
                    "url" : "stratum+tcp://us.eclipsemc.com:3333/",
                    "user" : "salfter_lanbox",
                    "pass" : "**redacted**"
            }
    ]

    The config file was unchanged from when I last used it.  cgminer 3.2.1 produces this error on startup:

    Code:
    [2013-06-12 09:04:09] Started cgminer 3.2.1
     [2013-06-12 09:04:09] Started cgminer 3.2.1
     [2013-06-12 09:04:09] Loaded configuration filehome/salfter/.cgminer/cgminer.
    conf
     [2013-06-12 09:04:10] Probing for an alive pool
     [2013-06-12 09:04:10] Failed to resolve (?wrong URL) us.eclipsemc.com:3333/
     [2013-06-12 09:04:10] Failed to resolve (?wrong URL) mint.bitminter.com:3333/

    When I downgraded to cgminer 3.1.0, it runs like a champ.  I've used cgminer 3.2.1 to mine altcoins on stratum pools...but I just noticed that the URLs for those pools don't have trailing slashes, while the ones for the Bitcoin pools do:

    Code:
    salfter@lanbox ~ $ grep stratum .cgminer/cgminer.conf.*
    .cgminer/cgminer.conf.bitcoin:         "url" : "stratum+tcp://mint.bitminter.com:3333/",
    .cgminer/cgminer.conf.bitcoin:         "url" : "stratum+tcp://us.eclipsemc.com:3333/",
    .cgminer/cgminer.conf.digitalcoin:              "url" : "stratum+tcp://dgcpool.com:3333",
    .cgminer/cgminer.conf.digitalcoin:              "url" : "stratum+tcp://pool.digicoinpool.com:3344",
    .cgminer/cgminer.conf.feathercoin:              "url" : "stratum+tcp://stratum.wemineftc.com:4444",
    .cgminer/cgminer.conf.feathercoin:              "url" : "stratum+tcp://pool.fcpool.com:3334",
    .cgminer/cgminer.conf.feathercoin:              "url" : "stratum+tcp://feathercoin.is-a-geek.com:3333",
    .cgminer/cgminer.conf.litecoin:         "url" : "stratum+tcp://us.wemineltc.com:80",
    .cgminer/cgminer.conf.litecoin:         "url" : "stratum+tcp://eu.wemineltc.com:3333",
    .cgminer/cgminer.conf.worldcoin:                "url" : "stratum+tcp://wdc-eu.epools.org:3334",

    I think cgminer 3.2.1 might not like the trailing slash, while previous versions didn't care.
    Tipjars: BTC 1TipsGocnz2N5qgAm9f7JLrsMqkb3oXe2 LTC LTipsVC7XaFy9M6Zaf1aGGe8w8xVUeWFvR | My Bitcoin Note Generator | Pool Auto-Switchers: zpool MiningPoolHub NiceHash
    Bitgem Resources: Pool Explorer Paper Wallet

  • -ck (OP)
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 4606
    Merit: 1701


    Ruu \o/


    View Profile WWW
    June 12, 2013, 05:05:45 PM
     #10917
    Quote from: salfter on June 12, 2013, 04:13:01 PM
    [2013-06-12 09:04:10] Failed to resolve (?wrong URL) us.eclipsemc.com:3333/
     [2013-06-12 09:04:10] Failed to resolve (?wrong URL) mint.bitminter.com:3333/
    Get rid of the trailing slashes.
    Developer/maintainer for cgminer, ckpool/ckproxy, and the -ck kernel
    2% Fee Solo mining at solo.ckpool.org
    -ck

  • turtle83
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 322
    Merit: 250


    Supersonic


    View Profile WWW
    June 12, 2013, 07:20:53 PM
     #10918
    How to get the network difficulty per coin or pool?

    I am using cgminer with multiple pools for different coins. Then using the API to control which pool is currently active (all sha256). But, I want to query a particular coins current difficulty. Is it possible?

    the pool command gives output like http://pastie.org/private/c2qa7mv7dsncpnyxkcryoa for each pool. No difficulty.
    the coin command gives

    Code:
    {u'COIN': [{u'Current Block Hash': u'xxxxSNIPxxxx',
       u'Current Block Time': 1371063749.732006,
       u'Hash Method': u'sha256',
       u'LP': True,
       u'Network Difficulty': 295934.4819144}],
     u'STATUS': [{u'Code': 78,
       u'Description': u'cgminer 3.1.1',
       u'Msg': u'CGMiner coin',
       u'STATUS': u'S',
       u'When': 1371064803}],
     u'id': 1}

    Which i presume belongs to the current active pool (ppcoin).

    Q1: Is it possible to get 'Network Difficulty' in pool output?
    Q2: Is it possible to create our own "coin" objects and associate pools to a coin? If so how?

    Apologies if its been asked before, i couldn't find a solution.
    FPGA/ASIC only: Raspberry pi packages for cgminer | Ubuntu PPA for mining related software

  • crazyates
    Legendary
    *
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 952
    Merit: 1000



    View Profile
    June 12, 2013, 07:46:11 PM
     #10919
    Quote from: turtle83 on June 12, 2013, 07:20:53 PM
    I am using cgminer with multiple pools for different coins.

    Taken straight from the first paragraph of the README:
    Quote
    Do not use on multiple block chains at the same time!
    Tips? 1crazy8pMqgwJ7tX7ZPZmyPwFbc6xZKM9
    Previous Trade History - Sale Thread

  • turtle83
    Sr. Member
    ****
    Offline Offline

    Activity: 322
    Merit: 250


    Supersonic


    View Profile WWW
    June 12, 2013, 08:10:26 PM
     #10920
    Quote from: crazyates on June 12, 2013, 07:46:11 PM
    Quote from: turtle83 on June 12, 2013, 07:20:53 PM
    I am using cgminer with multiple pools for different coins.

    Taken straight from the first paragraph of the README:
    Quote
    Do not use on multiple block chains at the same time!

    Hmm.. i thought adding "--failover-only" makes any pool mixup go away? havent noticed any issues doing it this way... and restarting cgminer takes minutes (~4 seconds per fpga each configured serially).
    FPGA/ASIC only: Raspberry pi packages for cgminer | Ubuntu PPA for mining related software
    Pages: « 1 ... 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 [546] 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 ... 843 »
      Print  
Page 545
Viewing Page: 546

IRLBTC™ © 2025 IRLBTC.com