Overclock.net › Forums › Distributed Computing › Distributed Computing - General › [Official] BitCoin LiteCoin DigitalCoin and all Crypto Currencies Club And General Information Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[Official] BitCoin LiteCoin DigitalCoin and all Crypto Currencies Club And General Information Thread - Page 1340

post #13391 of 22537
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivanlabrie View Post

Nah, doesn't work the same way...I know why I ask for this instead of a super complex single core. (won't say why though mwahaha)

I'm pretty sure a single big core is as efficient as many small cores.

Idle power is 100W. Similar power per core. 7870 1280 core, 7970 2048 core.


Big cores might be more expensive due to more failure rates though.

Well, my school bus is cancelled which means I have more time to work on my essay and chem. Yay -_-
Power Bac G5
(6 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel i7 6950X EVGA GTX 1080 Ti GSkill 32GB 4133Mhz Samsung 960 Pro 1TB 
CoolingMonitor
Corsair H110i ASUS PG278Q 
  hide details  
Reply
Power Bac G5
(6 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel i7 6950X EVGA GTX 1080 Ti GSkill 32GB 4133Mhz Samsung 960 Pro 1TB 
CoolingMonitor
Corsair H110i ASUS PG278Q 
  hide details  
Reply
post #13392 of 22537
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLAWNOOB View Post

I'm pretty sure a single big core is as efficient as many small cores.

Sorry to disagree, but I'd love to hear the reasoning behind that statement.

Actually a single complex core is almost never as efficient as many smaller cores. This holds for nearly any compute job. The only exception to this is in dealing with extremely non-optimized code. If the job is logically impossible to calculate out of order or multi-threaded then having the most complete command set residing in a single core running at the fastest possible clock speed will indeed be faster. On the other hand, if the code is simple and easily optimized to enable out of order executions on multiple threads... then you will not only get there faster with multiple, slower cores - but you have the added benefit of being able to be much more efficient power-wise as you can effectively shut down unused cores as the job allows.

In the case of mining - this is exactly why ASIC miners beat out GPUs by an order of magnitude (or more if you count efficiency per watt)... because you can have in the same watt-footprint 20-40 ASICs all working independently as opposed to a single GPU which is only using a fraction of it's transistors and pathways to perform the same calculations.

Sorry but there was definitely a reason for CISCs over-taking RISCs in PCs and GPUs... because we started requiring them to do way more diverse tasks than simple floating point calculations and address lookups. There is likewise a reason that multi-core CPUs and soon GPUs as well are no longer restricted to high-end server, but are found even in smartphones, etc.

biggrin.gif
post #13393 of 22537
Quote:
Originally Posted by ivanlabrie View Post

Nah, doesn't work the same way...I know why I ask for this instead of a super complex single core. (won't say why though mwahaha)

what are you mining now mate? biggrin.gif
post #13394 of 22537
Quote:
Originally Posted by DiGiCiDAL View Post

Sorry to disagree, but I'd love to hear the reasoning behind that statement.

Actually a single complex core is almost never as efficient as many smaller cores. This holds for nearly any compute job. The only exception to this is in dealing with extremely non-optimized code. If the job is logically impossible to calculate out of order or multi-threaded then having the most complete command set residing in a single core running at the fastest possible clock speed will indeed be faster. On the other hand, if the code is simple and easily optimized to enable out of order executions on multiple threads... then you will not only get there faster with multiple, slower cores - but you have the added benefit of being able to be much more efficient power-wise as you can effectively shut down unused cores as the job allows.

In the case of mining - this is exactly why ASIC miners beat out GPUs by an order of magnitude (or more if you count efficiency per watt)... because you can have in the same watt-footprint 20-40 ASICs all working independently as opposed to a single GPU which is only using a fraction of it's transistors and pathways to perform the same calculations.

Sorry but there was definitely a reason for CISCs over-taking RISCs in PCs and GPUs... because we started requiring them to do way more diverse tasks than simple floating point calculations and address lookups. There is likewise a reason that multi-core CPUs and soon GPUs as well are no longer restricted to high-end server, but are found even in smartphones, etc.

biggrin.gif

I understand what you are saying, but GPU cores are highly modular. A bigger package just means more CUDA or stream cores in it. Sorry I should of said bigger dies or packages instead of saying bigger cores.
Power Bac G5
(6 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel i7 6950X EVGA GTX 1080 Ti GSkill 32GB 4133Mhz Samsung 960 Pro 1TB 
CoolingMonitor
Corsair H110i ASUS PG278Q 
  hide details  
Reply
Power Bac G5
(6 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel i7 6950X EVGA GTX 1080 Ti GSkill 32GB 4133Mhz Samsung 960 Pro 1TB 
CoolingMonitor
Corsair H110i ASUS PG278Q 
  hide details  
Reply
post #13395 of 22537
Quote:
Originally Posted by blkdoutgsxr View Post

The problem that I see with the new maxwell chips are the hashing power, though it may be power efficient, is just not enough. To build a 6 card 1800 Khash machine just seems a little... Meh. I have to factor in another MB/CPU/RAM/HD/OS/Alum for case, this adds up. 270s are kinda where I drew the line, maybe I will have to revisit this though. The 270s didn't peak peoples interest (until everything else was exhausted) while other cards that were less efficient were on the market. There are a lot of people who mine with their gaming cards to which they want the best, These will only really appeal to the farmers out there (maybe not even them)

Edit: I am not saying that I will not invest in some of these cards, but if they become popular, price will quickly rise and the hash/$ will drop to the floor. I will make a cost sheet and see if they are worth it for me though, I want monies.

It is my understanding from what I'm reading is that bigger, more powerful Maxwell cards are already in the pipeline for distribution later this year. If these bigger cards follow a similar Kh/s to watts ratio as this first iteration of these cards, it will require less cards to do the same work and at reduced power consumption v. the current R9/R7 cards. Without having seen these new Maxwell cards, all I'm saying is that they have the potential to be a real game changer in the mining hardware scene.
Roulette Run
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-8350 SABERTOOTH 990FX/GEN3 R2.0 Galaxy GTX 780 HOF G.Skill 
RAMCoolingOSMonitor
G.Skill Noctua NH-D14 120mm & 140mm SSO CPU Cooler Windows 7 ASUS VN247H-P Black 23.6" 1ms (GTG) HDMI Widesc... 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Y-RCP140 Antec CP-850 Antech 1200 Logitech M185 
Mouse PadAudio
None Klipsh THX 
  hide details  
Reply
Roulette Run
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-8350 SABERTOOTH 990FX/GEN3 R2.0 Galaxy GTX 780 HOF G.Skill 
RAMCoolingOSMonitor
G.Skill Noctua NH-D14 120mm & 140mm SSO CPU Cooler Windows 7 ASUS VN247H-P Black 23.6" 1ms (GTG) HDMI Widesc... 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Y-RCP140 Antec CP-850 Antech 1200 Logitech M185 
Mouse PadAudio
None Klipsh THX 
  hide details  
Reply
post #13396 of 22537
Anybody know if nVidia will improve OpenGL or CUDA support on Maxwell?
Power Bac G5
(6 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel i7 6950X EVGA GTX 1080 Ti GSkill 32GB 4133Mhz Samsung 960 Pro 1TB 
CoolingMonitor
Corsair H110i ASUS PG278Q 
  hide details  
Reply
Power Bac G5
(6 items)
 
  
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel i7 6950X EVGA GTX 1080 Ti GSkill 32GB 4133Mhz Samsung 960 Pro 1TB 
CoolingMonitor
Corsair H110i ASUS PG278Q 
  hide details  
Reply
post #13397 of 22537
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLAWNOOB View Post

I understand what you are saying, but GPU cores are highly modular. A bigger package just means more CUDA or stream cores in it. Sorry I should of said bigger dies or packages instead of saying bigger cores.

Ah OK... in that light then yes, I agree with you. In actuality I think that is the next and perhaps final step in microprocessor evolution - unless self-awareness ever becomes a possibility outside of a science fiction plot. A processor that is the silicon equivalent of both microcode and a hardware implementation of an on-execution compiler... essentially allowing on-the-fly reconfiguration to go from a 90% logic engine to a 90% calculation engine as required by the job. I see movement in that direction as quantum computing might provide for the speed required. Since in order to do this (at least as my small brain understand the problem) will require the compiler to be able to simultaneously execute every possible branch to determine the most optimal combination in achieving the result.
post #13398 of 22537
Think I'm going to start stocking up on coinye...If you can purchase it at 1 sat even I small bump to .2 doubles your money...i don't know if it will go anywhere but the risk is minimal with potential for big gain
Black Ice
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k - 4.9ghz @ 1.33v Asrock Z68 Extreme 7 PNY GTX 780 @ 1200mhz 4 x 4GB Gskill Sniper @2000mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
256GB Mushkin Enhanced Chronos Deluxe SSD & 640... Liteon Blueray & Liteon DVDRW w/ iXtreme Burner... Custom Watercooing Loop Windows 8.1 Pro 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG 32LD450 & Dell Ultrasharp 24" (portrait) Logitech G15 Silverstone Strider Gold 1200w Customized Corsair 800d 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Roccat Kone+ Razer Goliathus Micro Fast Asus Xonar STX 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600k  Asrock Extreme P67 Extreme 6 EVGA GTX670 16gb DDR3 1600mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
256gb M4 SSD + 24TB (1TB WDB, 2 x 1.5TB WDG, 5 ... LG DVDRW Corsair H-70 Windows 7 x64 w/ Plexpass 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Epson 3020 3d 106" Projector Microsoft Wireless Entertainment 8000 Corsair CX600 NMEDIA 6000B 
MouseMouse PadAudioOther
Wireless Entertainment 8000 Generic Onboard Optical Toslink Out Ceton InfiniTV 4 
  hide details  
Reply
Black Ice
(15 items)
 
   
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3770k - 4.9ghz @ 1.33v Asrock Z68 Extreme 7 PNY GTX 780 @ 1200mhz 4 x 4GB Gskill Sniper @2000mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
256GB Mushkin Enhanced Chronos Deluxe SSD & 640... Liteon Blueray & Liteon DVDRW w/ iXtreme Burner... Custom Watercooing Loop Windows 8.1 Pro 64bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
LG 32LD450 & Dell Ultrasharp 24" (portrait) Logitech G15 Silverstone Strider Gold 1200w Customized Corsair 800d 
MouseMouse PadAudio
Roccat Kone+ Razer Goliathus Micro Fast Asus Xonar STX 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 2600k  Asrock Extreme P67 Extreme 6 EVGA GTX670 16gb DDR3 1600mhz 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
256gb M4 SSD + 24TB (1TB WDB, 2 x 1.5TB WDG, 5 ... LG DVDRW Corsair H-70 Windows 7 x64 w/ Plexpass 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Epson 3020 3d 106" Projector Microsoft Wireless Entertainment 8000 Corsair CX600 NMEDIA 6000B 
MouseMouse PadAudioOther
Wireless Entertainment 8000 Generic Onboard Optical Toslink Out Ceton InfiniTV 4 
  hide details  
Reply
post #13399 of 22537
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLAWNOOB View Post

I'm pretty sure a single big core is as efficient as many small cores.

Idle power is 100W. Similar power per core. 7870 1280 core, 7970 2048 core.


Big cores might be more expensive due to more failure rates though.

Well, my school bus is cancelled which means I have more time to work on my essay and chem. Yay -_-

Not really, you need more smaller yet faster/more efficient small cores for optimal performance at memory hard mining algos, specially with the way lookup gap implementations work.
That's why, mainly a software thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DiGiCiDAL View Post

Sorry to disagree, but I'd love to hear the reasoning behind that statement.

Actually a single complex core is almost never as efficient as many smaller cores. This holds for nearly any compute job. The only exception to this is in dealing with extremely non-optimized code. If the job is logically impossible to calculate out of order or multi-threaded then having the most complete command set residing in a single core running at the fastest possible clock speed will indeed be faster. On the other hand, if the code is simple and easily optimized to enable out of order executions on multiple threads... then you will not only get there faster with multiple, slower cores - but you have the added benefit of being able to be much more efficient power-wise as you can effectively shut down unused cores as the job allows.

In the case of mining - this is exactly why ASIC miners beat out GPUs by an order of magnitude (or more if you count efficiency per watt)... because you can have in the same watt-footprint 20-40 ASICs all working independently as opposed to a single GPU which is only using a fraction of it's transistors and pathways to perform the same calculations.

Sorry but there was definitely a reason for CISCs over-taking RISCs in PCs and GPUs... because we started requiring them to do way more diverse tasks than simple floating point calculations and address lookups. There is likewise a reason that multi-core CPUs and soon GPUs as well are no longer restricted to high-end server, but are found even in smartphones, etc.

biggrin.gif

Agreed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by arcade9 View Post

what are you mining now mate? biggrin.gif

Yacoin, Protoshares and Ultracoin, depending on which performs best on each piece of hardware I own or manage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLAWNOOB View Post

I understand what you are saying, but GPU cores are highly modular. A bigger package just means more CUDA or stream cores in it. Sorry I should of said bigger dies or packages instead of saying bigger cores.

The way memory hard algorithms like scrypt-jane work, it makes it so that you run out of memory for your threads if you run many threads per device with high intensity.
This implies lowering intensity on high end cards, or having to halve memory requirement per thread and trying to run more smaller threads per device.
Ends up causing you to have to rely on intensity fine tuning, something which is not really optimal with standard cgminer forks (except for the one based in kalroth's cgminer which has raw intensity incorporated in the code by Thirtybird, yacminer 3.4.0.; or cudaminer which shines at memory hard algos more than scrypt, mainly because fast scrypt nvidia cards so far consume way more than similarly fast amd cards->say GTX 780ti, can get to 900kh/s but it'll draw like 400w doing so and need water cooling whereas a 290 can do the same thing at 300w)

If scrypt asics come, mining scrypt will be kinda pointless eventually and I wanna be prepared. Nvidia might be able to compete if the higher end Maxwell cards can indeed match or beat AMD at power efficiency mining scrypt, but they will still probably cost a lot and/or suck/don't beat lower end cards by too much when it comes to memory hard algorithms like yacoin's scrypt-jane or Vertcoin's variable N factor Scrypt.
post #13400 of 22537
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheLAWNOOB View Post

Anybody know if nVidia will improve OpenGL or CUDA support on Maxwell?

You are aware that a new cudaminer was just released 2-3 days ago with Maxwell support? I'm using it right now.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=167229.0
Edited by Roulette Run - 2/21/14 at 7:15am
Roulette Run
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-8350 SABERTOOTH 990FX/GEN3 R2.0 Galaxy GTX 780 HOF G.Skill 
RAMCoolingOSMonitor
G.Skill Noctua NH-D14 120mm & 140mm SSO CPU Cooler Windows 7 ASUS VN247H-P Black 23.6" 1ms (GTG) HDMI Widesc... 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Y-RCP140 Antec CP-850 Antech 1200 Logitech M185 
Mouse PadAudio
None Klipsh THX 
  hide details  
Reply
Roulette Run
(14 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX-8350 SABERTOOTH 990FX/GEN3 R2.0 Galaxy GTX 780 HOF G.Skill 
RAMCoolingOSMonitor
G.Skill Noctua NH-D14 120mm & 140mm SSO CPU Cooler Windows 7 ASUS VN247H-P Black 23.6" 1ms (GTG) HDMI Widesc... 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
Logitech Y-RCP140 Antec CP-850 Antech 1200 Logitech M185 
Mouse PadAudio
None Klipsh THX 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Distributed Computing - General
Overclock.net › Forums › Distributed Computing › Distributed Computing - General › [Official] BitCoin LiteCoin DigitalCoin and all Crypto Currencies Club And General Information Thread