Cryptocoin Mining?

[taltamir]

What stats?

Do you have screenshots etc? What clocks etc?

I haven't seen the 780 ti mining hashrates but AFAIK it wasn't up at the same level.

Best results are gotten with
cudaminer -r 10 -R 30 -T 30 -H 1 -i 0 -C 2 -l auto

But you can get nearly the same with just
cudaminer -i 0

I personally am not a fan of -H command at all since it uses up CPU to boost certain components of the calculation at the cost of power efficiency.

Comparing two gigabyte factory overclocked cards (and in both cases I have not bothered manually overclocking them). The R9 290X gets ~620 and the 780 Ti gets ~690. It used to be 610 before a recent update to cudaminer AND a recent update to drivers (as in, yesterday) each of which each gave a good boost to performance.

It is worth noting that the AMD gets 1/10th the performance if intensity is set to even a mere 18 out of 20 (which causes the desktop to stutter too badly to use). Intensity absolutely has to be on 20 (max). Which makes the PC unusable. (aka, it has to be a dedicated mining rig).

The nvidia on the other hand can be dropped to running cudaminer without any arguments at all. Giving ~580 kh/s on a machine while allowing me to use it freely. I can even play some games.
For example, AC4 Black Flag max everything 1440p cannot be played on it. But DDO can be played on max everything in 1440p and it will merely drop my hashrate to 450 KH/s while I am gaming.

 

[IEC]

I'm not sure in what universe a 780 Ti is going to get > 900 kH/s scrypt at stock TDP, which is what a R290X is capable of.

 

[IEC]

Best results are gotten with
cudaminer -r 10 -R 30 -T 30 -H 1 -i 0 -C 2 -l auto

But even just
cudaminer -i 0
will do very well.

Comparing two gigabyte factory overclocked cards. The R9 290X gets ~620 and the 780 Ti gets ~690. It used to be 620 before a recent update to cudaminer AND a recent update to drivers (as in, yesterday) which each gave a good boost to performance.

What algorithm and coin are you mining? For scrypt a 290X can easily get you north of 900 kH/s at stock TDP.

 

[xodusgenesis]

Both my 290x's get 980kh/s each and if a 780ti could do that, I would have bought them in a heartbeat, because of the noise and heat.

 

[taltamir]

What algorithm and coin are you mining? For scrypt a 290X can easily get you north of 900 kH/s at stock TDP.

It was an utter nightmare just squeezing 620 KH/s out of it. At first it was hashing at a mere 20 KH/s.
Also, all the stuff I have seen online shows massive OCs to get those kind of KH/s

 

[taltamir]

I'm not sure in what universe a 780 Ti is going to get > 900 kH/s scrypt at stock TDP, which is what a R290X is capable of.

Did you not read the post right above yours?

Comparing two gigabyte factory overclocked cards (and in both cases I have not bothered manually overclocking them). The R9 290X gets ~620 and the 780 Ti gets ~690.

 

[Piotrsama]

Is your 290X overheating and throttling? sounds like yours has a problem, or you are using the wrong configuration for it.
Check here:
https://litecoin.info/Mining_hardware_comparison

 

[SimianR]

It was an utter nightmare just squeezing 620 KH/s out of it. At first it was hashing at a mere 20 KH/s.
Also, all the stuff I have seen online shows massive OCs to get those kind of KH/s

Huh? I underclock/undervolt my Tri-X R9 290 and get 845 KH/s.

 

[wand3r3r]

Best results are gotten with
cudaminer -r 10 -R 30 -T 30 -H 1 -i 0 -C 2 -l auto

But you can get nearly the same with just
cudaminer -i 0

I personally am not a fan of -H command at all since it uses up CPU to boost certain components of the calculation at the cost of power efficiency.

Comparing two gigabyte factory overclocked cards (and in both cases I have not bothered manually overclocking them). The R9 290X gets ~620 and the 780 Ti gets ~690. It used to be 610 before a recent update to cudaminer AND a recent update to drivers (as in, yesterday) each of which each gave a good boost to performance.

It is worth noting that the AMD gets 1/10th the performance if intensity is set to even a mere 18 out of 20 (which causes the desktop to stutter too badly to use). Intensity absolutely has to be on 20 (max). Which makes the PC unusable. (aka, it has to be a dedicated mining rig).

The nvidia on the other hand can be dropped to running cudaminer without any arguments at all. Giving ~580 kh/s on a machine while allowing me to use it freely. I can even play some games.
For example, AC4 Black Flag max everything 1440p cannot be played on it. But DDO can be played on max everything in 1440p and it will merely drop my hashrate to 450 KH/s while I am gaming.

It was an utter nightmare just squeezing 620 KH/s out of it. At first it was hashing at a mere 20 KH/s.
Also, all the stuff I have seen online shows massive OCs to get those kind of KH/s

Ok, so you just weren't able to figure out how to run cgminer or configure it?

My underclocked 290x @900 core is faster than your 780 ti. If I bump the memory to 1500 (both of my cards go there) it's not even close. My second card hits 900 without a core overclock.

Basically you just made it up out of a sample size of 2 with your own ability / luck at configuring them. I haven't heard of a 290x getting as low of a hashrate as yours.

This is a small sample size, but even 290's are faster than your 780 ti.
https://litecoin.info/Mining_hardware_comparison


Here I thought there was something new that I hadn't heard about yet. :whiste:

You certainly don't need an overclock to easily beat that 780 ti hashrate. Then again if that's all you could get on the 290/x then I wouldn't be surprised if the 780 ti has more in store, unless it's easier to configure or if you found the right way easier.

 

[taltamir]

Is your 290X overheating and throttling? sounds like yours has a problem, or you are using the wrong configuration for it.
Check here:
https://litecoin.info/Mining_hardware_comparison

I have checked there, that is why I bought a damn 290x to begin with.
Then after getting it I checked again and this time I paid more attention and realized just how much those cards are overclocked, heck most of them are actually over volted. Also notice the liquid cooling and other fancy stuff

Ok, so you just weren't able to figure out how to run cgminer or configure it?

it was reliably crap on cgminer, sgminer, and guiminer.
It was also much more of a PITA to configure.
Also, I looked online, its pretty damn common for people to have such issues

 

[IEC]

Did you not read the post right above yours?

If you'll note, both those posts were made at the same time. I was responding to your "in my own testing" post.

But it's clear there is either something wrong with your card or you're not using the right miner/miner settings because even my undervolted, underclocked 290s get 800 kH/s.

 

[SimianR]

Also - Go vertcoin

It's nice to see Vertcoin going up and panda falling

 

[IEC]

I have checked there, that is why I bought a damn 290x to begin with.
Then after getting it I checked again and this time I paid more attention and realized just how much those cards are overclocked. Also notice the liquid cooling and other fancy stuff

With a 290 stock you should get 800 kH/s with the 947/1250 stock cards. With the factory non reference cards like the Tri-X, getting 845 kH/s with an undervolt and/or underclock is very common.

With 290X stock you should get > 900 kH/s.

Once you OC either card greater than 1000 kH/s is possible, but at the cost of increased heat and noise.

 

[chimaxi83]

It was an utter nightmare just squeezing 620 KH/s out of it. At first it was hashing at a mere 20 KH/s.
Also, all the stuff I have seen online shows massive OCs to get those kind of KH/s

620 was a nightmare? You're doing it wrong. My 290s at stock settings/BIOS hit 855KH/s average without breaking a sweat. The same is true for the rest of the 290/X owners in here who are hitting 900+.

620 is roughly in 7950 territory.

 

[SimianR]

I have checked there, that is why I bought a damn 290x to begin with.
Then after getting it I checked again and this time I paid more attention and realized just how much those cards are overclocked, heck most of them are actually over volted. Also notice the liquid cooling and other fancy stuff



it was reliably crap on cgminer, sgminer, and guiminer.
It was also much more of a PITA to configure.
Also, I looked online, its pretty damn common for people to have such issues

Taltamir why don't you post your cgminer config for your 290X so we can help you get it up and running correctly. Also - if it's a reference 290X you might want to keep an eye on the core clock speed when its mining to make sure it's staying at 1000mhz and not dropping to something like 600 and throttling.

 

[taltamir]

Taltamir why don't you post your cgminer config for your 290X so we can help you get it up and running correctly. Also - if it's a reference 290X you might want to keep an eye on the core clock speed when its mining to make sure it's staying at 1000mhz and not dropping to something like 600 and throttling.

I already packed it up for an RMA.

 

[SimianR]

That's too bad I doubt it needs an RMA.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

620 was a nightmare? You're doing it wrong. My 290s at stock settings/BIOS hit 855KH/s average without breaking a sweat. The same is true for the rest of the 290/X owners in here who are hitting 900+.

620 is roughly in 7950 territory.

Yeah, 7970/280X gets 690-700. 290X should see much more.

Taltamir, what coin are you mining? Did you under-volt? Under-volting was the key thing that brought my 280X from 400's to 600's.

 

[SunnyD]

I'm getting "job not found" rejects, not hardware errors. It seems to be worse on slower GPU's.

Again, lower your intensity.

I noticed with the keccak miner anything over something like 11 caused a much higher reject rate than usual while not affecting the hash rate at all. I had absolutely NO hardware errors even at intensity 14... just a ridiculous reject rate. Once I lowered the intensity the reject rate dropped significantly.

 

[Binky]

Again, lower your intensity.

I noticed with the keccak miner anything over something like 11 caused a much higher reject rate than usual while not affecting the hash rate at all. I had absolutely NO hardware errors even at intensity 14... just a ridiculous reject rate. Once I lowered the intensity the reject rate dropped significantly.

Ah, I never looked at rejects compared to intensity, only HW errors. You are correct that intensity seems to have little impact on the mhash. I'll see if 10-11 makes a difference.

I'm loving the lower temps and quietness of the max mining.

I should have an EVGA 750 ti by Friday, so I'll be tinkering with that one soon. Payback period should be less than 30 days.

 

[KingFatty]

Middlecoin has done a face plant.

Total fail now. Hope the operator gets it fixed, I liked the minimalist approach, but overnight it went to being worse than straight LTC mining.

On to vertiminer to look into scrypt N coins. A quick run here and it just looks like I need to run my rigs slightly more conservatively than they already were to get stable and it looks like the 270/270x make even more sense for scryptN vs the 280x than they did for litecoin type scrypt (scrypt -?).

Where do we think scrypt is going? Looks like asics will fail here which is good. Scrypt N or Scrypt Jane to take over? Biggest pain is having to fine tune rigs again.

Any idea what happened to Middlecoin? Were they mining the wrong fork of a coin and just lost a bunch of mining time or something weird?

I also noticed a big surge in the total hashrate at Wafflepool. But even with that boost in total hash rate, yesterday's full day of mining only managed an average of 0.00931525 BTC per day per MH/s. That seems pretty low.

I thought Middlecoin was still outperforming the average of 0.01 BTC/day/MH/s, is that no longer the case? I'm just sticking with Middlecoin to see if they do any better, but not sure if I want to switch to wafflecoin yet, unless they can consistently get over one bitpenny per day per megahash.

 

[Attic]

Any idea what happened to Middlecoin? Were they mining the wrong fork of a coin and just lost a bunch of mining time or something weird?

I also noticed a big surge in the total hashrate at Wafflepool. But even with that boost in total hash rate, yesterday's full day of mining only managed an average of 0.00931525 BTC per day per MH/s. That seems pretty low.

I thought Middlecoin was still outperforming the average of 0.01 BTC/day/MH/s, is that no longer the case? I'm just sticking with Middlecoin to see if they do any better, but not sure if I want to switch to wafflecoin yet, unless they can consistently get over one bitpenny per day per megahash.

No idea. It looks to me like the pool was left mining the wrong fork of doge for awhile and then things kept being run in a poor manner from there. I left after consecutive days of <0.005btc/mh. A lot of hash went to wafflepool and clevermining. Middlecoin has lost 7gh in past two days.

I'm mining vertcion now.

 

[slashbinslashbash]

Any idea what happened to Middlecoin? Were they mining the wrong fork of a coin and just lost a bunch of mining time or something weird?

I also noticed a big surge in the total hashrate at Wafflepool. But even with that boost in total hash rate, yesterday's full day of mining only managed an average of 0.00931525 BTC per day per MH/s. That seems pretty low.

I thought Middlecoin was still outperforming the average of 0.01 BTC/day/MH/s, is that no longer the case? I'm just sticking with Middlecoin to see if they do any better, but not sure if I want to switch to wafflecoin yet, unless they can consistently get over one bitpenny per day per megahash.

My theory is that Middlecoin was really profiting big from the Dogecoin variable block reward exploit. Not sure if they're still mining Doge at all now. Doge network hashrate has gone down considerably; it's consistently at 70-80 GH now. Before the halvening, it peaked around 120GH. I'm still mining at Dogehouse, and I honestly haven't noticed that much of a decline in my earnings (in DOGE terms of course -- USD exchange rates have gone down). If Middlecoin is no longer skimming the good blocks, combined with a lower difficulty, DOGE mining should still be roughly the same, or at least not as much of a decline as a halving of the block reward would imply.

 

[KentState]

Did you not read the post right above yours?

I went from 700MH/sec on my 280x OCed to 560MH/sec on my 780Ti.

 

[Mark R]

My theory is that Middlecoin was really profiting big from the Dogecoin variable block reward exploit.

That would be a real coup for the operator if true. It's certainly possible, the DOGE block reward is determined by the hash of the previous block in the chain, so it is absolutely predictable before mining starts on a block.

It certainly could explain some of the very odd behavior shown by the middlecoin pool, where it would mine DOGE for 1 block, then go and mine something else for 30 seconds, then go back to DOGE.

That said, given the very lackadasical attitude of the middlecoin developer over the last few months, I don't know if it's something that he'd spotted and taken advantage of.