ryzen and GPU plotting



  • Hi guys, recently upgraded my rig due to fckd up old MOBO bios and old i7. i have a ryzen 1700 and it plots 17k/minute(not OC), and i have rx 480 saphire nitro 8g, when i plot with it(direct) it says 30k/min then it will freeze(i know this is normal until it moves again) but the thing is when it moves the nonce/min is low and slowly building up like started at 30k/min → 4~6k/min then will slowly goin up. is this normal?



  • Hi,

    All depends on your hard-drive capacity, speed, cache.

    e.g. I have done plotting for 8TB Seagate Ironwolf 8TB NAS, 7200 RPM with 256MB Cach; plotting finished within 36 hours;

    where as my other drive, WD green 6TB with lesser RPM and cache; its took about 4 days in total;

    Next one I am going to try is seagate archive (its cheaper) and I am hopping it will take about 4-5 days as well.

    And yes, if you have external (connected via USB); you can format your drive with exFAT with cluster size of 128KB but your nonces will be different.

    Also, read if you external drive is already formated with NTFS then wont recommended you to format exFAT as HDD life expectancy will be dropped.

    you can optimize few params; if you are doing single drive use half of total memory (RAM) and increase paging as well based on available space.

    Regards,
    rolling_monkey
    BURST-RKPE-8HLG-UWAM-FWRYY



  • @rajeshpunjabi im using wd my book 8TB and yes it is NTFS as i have plotted other HDD before using cpu.
    ive also dried different device config based on others config, and i also experimented my self. as of now this is the best settings ive tried but maybe the bottleneck is the HDD -_-



  • I have never used CPU for mining; for me RX560 4GB is doing great job;

    my friend is using RX 480 8GB and he is having same struggle as you; l am not sure if its because of GPU.

    Thanks,
    Raj



  • @rajeshpunjabi most of the people i see(as i searched) reach the same speed as i have 30k/min using their rx 480 8g. but i dont know if does people is plotting buffer or direct, and if ever they are using direct do they experience the big decrease in nonce per min and gradually rising after.



  • @progryu009gaijin with our experience, direct is much better options compare to buffer; we are three (3) friends and concluded to stay with direct as well after doing few drives.

    Yes, you are right; its drops drastically but goes up again. For my current drive; its drop to about 2000 nonee/min; now its 4430/min on 64%; i have seen some good speed today; yesterday it was showing almost 3 days+ with only 19% done; right now its say 1 days 6 hours;

    I believe its does goes up and down;

    P.S. I am running mining as well in parallel on same machine but using CPU.

    Thanks.



  • @rajeshpunjabi yeah i figured it all out now, i did a lot of testing and i finally reached 30k → 7k at first then i goes back to 30k in a short time. thanks



  • @progryu009gaijin have you done any tuning? please share.



  • I've had the same experiences with direct plotting: the high initial speed, the apparent freeze while the plotter fills the drive, then the slow to high speeds after the initial plot. My RX-480 starts in the 35000 range, then drops to 2000-3000 and climbs from there. This is with version 4.0.3 of the software.

    I had heard there were improvements in the latest version, now at 4.1.3. I tried this and saw different behavior. No long freeze, but no initial fast speed either. Some say it is faster overall, for me it was not. I did not try different settings to optimize the plotting.

    You might make sure to try the latest version and see how it performs for you.



  • @rajeshpunjabi i did change a lot in device config but it doesnt work so i kept it as is 0 0 8096 64 8192 and change the stagger to lower number.

    @Evo can you share your device config and what stagger are you using?



  • @progryu009gaijin said in ryzen and GPU plotting:

    @rajeshpunjabi i did change a lot in device config but it doesnt work so i kept it as is 0 0 8096 64 8192 and change the stagger to lower number.

    @Evo can you share your device config and what stagger are you using?

    My setting for the RX-480 machine are 0 0 4096 64 8192. Again, I have not tried to optimize these values. I plot direct and have 10GB of RAM. I usually try to stray in the 5-6 GB range when plotting, less per drive if plotting two drives at a time. I choose a stagger value that gives me the RAM usage I want. So if I want 5GB RAM: 5 x 1024 * 1024 * 1024 = 5368709120 bytes. 1 nonce = 262144 bytes. I divide the first value by the last value. In this case I get a stagger size of 20480.



  • @Evo i really dont know now LOL i have 16GB ram, almost all thread that ive read are explaining about the stagger same as yours, but for me the lower the stagger the better. oh well im still trying a lot of experiment. thank you



  • I wrote a small program to help calculate values for plotting. The parameters are the free bytes on the disk, the RAM limits and how many plot files. It will then calculate plot file sizes and stagger so as to minimize free space on the disk. The calculated plot files are evenly divisible by the stagger size.
    0_1499776742614_Plots.png



  • @progryu009gaijin No! I agree! Small may be better. I did what I learned first. Now I am seeing others say that they get better results with small values.

    I think I will rewrite my app to allow the user to enter a chose stagger, small or large, and let if figure out the file sizes, etc.

    The reason I don't use one plot file is that I have had the plotter lock up on large (5TB or greater) plots, but never on anything in the 2TB to 3TB range.



  • Actually, I was going to bump up to more RAM, but now I want to experiment with the smaller values. But I'm glad people are trying new things and sharing results. One day we'll all be really good at this!!!



  • @Evo i was reading hours and hours about hot to plot using gpu but all threads are almost the same and i tried it all and i didnt work for me, so why not try to experiment and instead of bumping up the numbers lower it down, and now im seeing results. hope i can find a good config and ill post it here. as of now im trying stagger 128 LOL



  • @progryu009gaijin said in ryzen and GPU plotting:

    @Evo i was reading hours and hours about hot to plot using gpu but all threads are almost the same and i tried it all and i didnt work for me, so why not try to experiment and instead of bumping up the numbers lower it down, and now im seeing results. hope i can find a good config and ill post it here. as of now im trying stagger 128 LOL

    I have nothing to plot at the moment, or I would be doing the same experimenting. 128 is crazy small! That's 32MB of RAM. Well, if it works, use it.

    BTW, I also have an RTX-1060. It is much faster than the RX-480. With the older plotting software my initial speeds were just under 60000.



  • @Evo hahaha yeah crazy right and it didnt work LOL. im just waiting for my new drives to arrive and i will use them to experiment or i dont know maybe ill just use xplotter as im also mining eth.



  • @progryu009gaijin, I actually started using my plotting machine for mining, so I'm in the same boat. Not sure I'm going to buy more drives yet. The profits are so bad now I can't justify the expense. No ROI.



  • @Evo can you please share or help me to verify calculation for nonces; I am using calculator for now but like to automate my excel sheet.

    Based on NTFS Partition 64KB cluster.

    8 TB

    8192 GB
    9863168 MB
    11875254272 KB

    Nonces size will be 11875254272 / 4.

    Correct?

    Thanks


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to Burst - Efficient HDD Mining was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.