What linux and driver will be the best ?
Yeah same here. Absolutely NO SLEEP since October 28th.
2 Likes
+1 Windows… will switch right away for those hash rate.
Did someone figure out his devfee?
Crash on startup.
2016-11-13 00:10:17,425 INFO [default] Using device ‘Ellesmere’
2016-11-13 00:10:17,425 ERROR [default] OpenCL error: Failed to read bin/X_base.bin (-1)
Ubuntu 16.04.1LTS
Any chanche of Ubuntu 14.04 and GCN 1.0 support ?
I get:
‘/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.20’ not found (required by ./optiminer-zcash)’
Since it’s linked against a newer GLIBC tha what’s in 14.04.
I had this issue on Ubuntu 14.04:
./optiminer-zcash: /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libstdc++.so.6: version `GLIBCXX_3.4.20’ not found (required by ./optiminer-zcash)
Solution:
sudo add-apt-repository ppa:ubuntu-toolchain-r/test
sudo apt-get update
sudo apt-get install libstdc++6
The r9 nano at 175 S/s is interesting because it does not make sense compared to the others if bus bandwidth is the ultimate factor. It’s bus bandwidth is between the R9 290 and RX 470. It’s different by using a huge channel and slow speed. At 175 S/s compared to the R9 290, it’s going 40% faster than it’s bus bandwidth suggests. In other words, someone needs to check that one.
[edit trolloniex has pointed out that the difference is that it uses HBM instead of DDR5 ]
Great !
Thanx, up and running now.
It’s HBM and the same as the Fury X but with lower clocks / power usage
3 Likes
so fast… how about dev fee ??
Cool!
What is a healthy temp, my rx480 running at 74 C?
If Fury is 2x the BW of the nano and everything is totally based on bandwidth as it has been so far (see the thread I just started) then the fury should be capably of 350 S/s with this code, and 440 S/s if it can be made as efficient as CPUs are when using their bandwidth. That HBM seems to be somehow making the bus 40% faster. How? Latency and writes in DDR5 slow things down that much?
Based on my experience so far, I’m calculating 25% dev fee, this may be off as the pool varies, but it appears that’s the delta I am experiencing in hashrate locally and hashrate on pool. To that end, I’m switching back to Silentarmy as I net more hash on pool with it.
1 Like
how much is a dev fee?
Gratz on your ground breaking equihash performance, optiminer!
Are you interested in optimizing my Cuckoo Cycle solvers,
and claiming some of the $5000 in bounties?
3 Likes
Well, frankly, I don’t mind if he has 10% devfee, it’s still the fastest miner at the moment. BUT! I would appreciate if he told us what exactly IS the devfee. Is he ashamed to admit it or what? After some time we will calculate it anyway, so why is he hiding this fact?
I don’t agree I see +25% in my earnings on flypool with optiminer.
Although it might not be as stable as SAv5,
just had a soft crash:
2016-11-12 15:48:19,298 FATAL [default] CRASH HANDLED; Application has crashed due to [SIGSEGV] signal
2016-11-12 15:48:19,298 WARN [default] Aborting application. Reason: Fatal log at […/logging/easylogging++.h:5627]
./flypool.sh: line 1: 14620 Aborted (core dumped) ./optiminer-zcash --stratum eu1-zcash.flypool.org:3333 -u xxx -p xxx
People accused claymore of sneaking more than he said, or maybe it’s arguable depending on how it’s calculated. I think it’s a good thing to just say it’s a lot and let users figure it out themselves. ~25% developer fee? More power to him. It’s a free market and he’s making an honest transaction within legal bounds which is more than you can say for 50% of the things we buy.
1 Like