Optimization for AMD Threadripper 1950X

[kimpurcell]

Hi, could you optimize the code for the AMD 1950X? It has 8MB L2 and 32MB L3. Is there a setting we can tweak to cater to the bigger L2?

Thanks.

[psychocrypt]

You should first start with the auto suggested config from the miner, IMO such configuration should be supported out of the box. It can be that the auto suggestions had some problems with the big L2 and creates not a optimal config, in that case one way to solve it would be to give me or @fireice-uk access to your system and we can check the auto suggestion code snipped. I have no access to a Threadripper system therefore this would currently the only solution. I think if something went wrong with the auto detection we can fix it within a few hours if we can get access (no root access needed)

[kimpurcell]

Sounds really good, psychoscrypt. How should I go about giving you access to my Threadripper system? I'm thinking we can set up a TeamViewer session.

On another note, I'm going out of town for a while so maybe we can work this when I get back next month.

[psychocrypt]

Do you have linux on the system? I missed to say that we can do this only on a linux system because a teamviewer will be to slow I have problems with my provider and I hate windows :-). If you have linux and time please contact me via reddit (user: psychocrypt) and point to this issue. I can give you my ssh key.

[Bewinxed]

@psychocrypt hey there, I am available if you wanna connect to my system and check it out, I'm on windows though, Teamviewer would be available on Linux though but if you need me to install something special on windows to make you connect or if there's a log i can send you to check i'm down for it! :)

[JulesGosnell]

Guys, I have a 1950x system running Fedora - I could set up ssh access onto the back of it for you... I think - not sure if I have a dyndns set up anymore, but could probably sort out a new one.

Would that do the trick ?

The same box also boots Windows 10. I've been trying the xmr-stack-cpu-notls-64 download on it,

The suggested thread config only used 16 threads and ran the cpu at 50%.

I'm trying:

"cpu_threads_conf" : [ { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 0 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 1 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 2 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 3 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 4 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 5 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 6 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 7 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 8 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 9 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 10 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 11 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 12 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 13 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 14 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 15 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 16 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 17 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 18 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 19 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 20 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 21 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 22 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 23 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 24 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 25 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 26 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 27 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 28 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 29 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 30 }, ],

"nicehash_nonce" : true,

I haven't tinkered with anything else other than point the pool/wallet details at my NiceHash account.

The cpu is pegged at 100%.

NiceHash says I am getting 0.27 kH/s, which doesn't feel like much.

The hashrate report says:

... [2017-09-25 21:27:41] : New block detected. [2017-09-25 21:28:18] : Result accepted by the pool. HASHRATE REPORT | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | | 0 | (na) | 10.5 | 10.4 | 1 | 10.7 | 10.7 | 10.8 | | 2 | 10.2 | 9.9 | 10.0 | 3 | 10.8 | 10.6 | 10.6 | | 4 | (na) | 10.3 | 10.2 | 5 | (na) | 10.6 | 10.6 | | 6 | (na) | 10.8 | 10.8 | 7 | 10.6 | 10.8 | 10.7 | | 8 | 10.8 | 10.6 | 10.5 | 9 | (na) | 10.7 | 10.7 | | 10 | (na) | 11.0 | 10.8 | 11 | (na) | 11.0 | 10.8 | | 12 | 9.2 | 8.8 | 9.7 | 13 | 10.3 | 10.6 | 10.8 | | 14 | 10.6 | 10.6 | 10.7 | 15 | (na) | 10.6 | 10.7 | | 16 | (na) | 10.4 | 10.5 | 17 | (na) | 10.7 | 10.8 | | 18 | (na) | 10.8 | 10.8 | 19 | 10.6 | 10.8 | 10.7 | | 20 | (na) | 9.9 | 9.9 | 21 | 10.4 | 10.4 | 10.5 | | 22 | 10.7 | 10.7 | 10.7 | 23 | (na) | 10.7 | 10.7 | | 24 | (na) | 10.3 | 10.3 | 25 | 10.4 | 10.4 | 10.5 | | 26 | 10.8 | 10.6 | 10.6 | 27 | (na) | 10.6 | 10.6 | | 28 | (na) | 9.5 | 9.6 | 29 | (na) | 10.7 | 10.9 | | 30 | 80.9 | 82.1 | 82.2 |

Totals: (na) 396.5 398.0 H/s Highest: 0.0 H/s

I've seen 1204H/s being reported for a 1950x here:

https://forums.servethehome.com/index.php?threads/monero-mining-performance.12116/

So, I think something is going wrong...

How do we take this forward ?

Jules

[JulesGosnell]

BTW - the same box has a Vega 64 in it, if that is of any interest ?

Jules

[JulesGosnell]

Hhmmm..

I've gone back to the suggested thread config, which I assume is only running one thread per core and not taking advantage of SMT/Hyperthreading.

HASHRATE REPORT | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | | 0 | 72.3 | 70.9 | (na) | 1 | 74.8 | 73.4 | (na) | | 2 | 74.4 | 72.7 | (na) | 3 | 73.2 | 71.3 | (na) | | 4 | 80.7 | 80.5 | (na) | 5 | 80.2 | 79.8 | (na) | | 6 | 80.3 | 80.3 | (na) | 7 | 80.3 | 80.4 | (na) | | 8 | 77.0 | 76.9 | (na) | 9 | 77.2 | 77.4 | (na) | | 10 | 78.2 | 77.6 | (na) | 11 | 78.1 | 78.0 | (na) | | 12 | 81.5 | 80.9 | (na) | 13 | 81.5 | 80.7 | (na) | | 14 | 80.6 | 80.6 | (na) | 15 | 81.4 | 80.8 | (na) |

Totals: 1251.8 1242.2 (na) H/s Highest: 1268.2 H/s

My hashrate now looks good - but my CPU is only running at 50% - does this mean that I can double this hash rate somehow or can xmr-stak-cpu only use one thread per physical core, leaving me with 16 other ?non-native? threads to run other stuff on ?

many thanks,

Jules

[psychocrypt]

@all thanks for the offer to get access. I can only join linux machines because my network provider (vodafone) is so bad that I only get one Mbit/s ovet my 100 Mbit/s. I will contact you if I have more time to join one of your systems, currently I working hard for the next gen stak miner.

1.2kh/s sounds not bad. If the cpu is only 50% utilized it is no problem. The miner is limited by the available cache. Therefore it is not possible to get more hashes if thw other 50% compute power will be used.

Am 26.09.2017 00:28 schrieb "Julian Gosnell" notifications@github.com:

Hhmmm..

I've gone back to the suggested thread config, which I assume is only running one thread per core and not taking advantage of SMP/Hyperthreading. HASHRATE REPORT | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | | 0 | 72.3 | 70.9 | (na) | 1 | 74.8 | 73.4 | (na) | | 2 | 74.4 | 72.7 | (na) | 3 | 73.2 | 71.3 | (na) | | 4 | 80.7 | 80.5 | (na) | 5 | 80.2 | 79.8 | (na) | | 6 | 80.3 | 80.3 | (na) | 7 | 80.3 | 80.4 | (na) | | 8 | 77.0 | 76.9 | (na) | 9 | 77.2 | 77.4 | (na) | | 10 | 78.2 | 77.6 | (na) | 11 | 78.1 | 78.0 | (na) | | 12 | 81.5 | 80.9 | (na) | 13 | 81.5 | 80.7 | (na) | | 14 | 80.6 | 80.6 | (na) | 15 | 81.4 | 80.8 | (na) |

Totals: 1251.8 1242.2 (na) H/s Highest: 1268.2 H/s

My hashrate now looks good - but my CPU is only running at 50% - does this mean that I can double this hash rate somehow or can xmr-stak-cpu only use one thread per physical core, leaving me with 16 other ?non-native? threads to run other stuff on ?

many thanks,

Jules

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned.

Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/fireice-uk/xmr-stak-cpu/issues/299#issuecomment-332032141, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AYsxtnTJea_6YctfLEx9SLH3Rcb0nggZks5smCkIgaJpZM4PDlrb .

[peterjenner]

Just to confirm Jules' results, I also have a 1950x system with xmr-stack-cpu-notls-64 running and I use the suggested config.

"cpu_threads_conf" : [ { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 0 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 2 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 4 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 6 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 8 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 10 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 12 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 14 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 16 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 18 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 20 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 22 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 24 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 26 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 28 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 30 }, ],

HASHRATE REPORT | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | | 0 | 69.5 | 65.0 | 64.3 | 1 | 73.3 | 68.3 | 67.8 | | 2 | 73.6 | 69.5 | 69.3 | 3 | 73.5 | 70.3 | 70.2 | | 4 | 80.8 | 74.4 | 75.8 | 5 | 81.1 | 74.8 | 76.6 | | 6 | 80.9 | 74.0 | 75.5 | 7 | 80.7 | 74.3 | 75.0 | | 8 | 78.6 | 74.9 | 74.4 | 9 | 76.6 | 73.0 | 71.9 | | 10 | 78.7 | 75.3 | 74.5 | 11 | 78.1 | 75.6 | 74.7 | | 12 | 77.8 | 76.2 | 75.1 | 13 | 77.2 | 75.5 | 74.4 | | 14 | 77.4 | 75.1 | 74.5 | 15 | 78.2 | 75.8 | 74.4 |

Totals: 1236.1 1171.9 1168.4 H/s Highest: 1259.5 H/s

I hope that's helpful.

Cheers.

[Bewinxed]

Don’t use hyper threading, use the recommended settings and OC the CPU a bit, I get 1350H on 3.9ghz

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: Julian Gosnell Sent: Tuesday, September 26, 2017 1:34 AM To: fireice-uk/xmr-stak-cpu Cc: Bewinxed; Comment Subject: Re: [fireice-uk/xmr-stak-cpu] Optimization for AMD Threadripper 1950X(#299)

Guys, I have a 1950x system running Fedora - I could set up ssh access onto the back of it for you... I think - not sure if I have a dyndns set up anymore, but could probably sort out a new one. Would that do the trick ? The same box also boots Windows 10. I've been trying the xmr-stack-cpu-notls-64 download on it, The suggested thread config only used 16 threads and ran the cpu at 50%. I'm trying: "cpu_threads_conf" : [ { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 0 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 1 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 2 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 3 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 4 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 5 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 6 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 7 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 8 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 9 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 10 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 11 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 12 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 13 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 14 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 15 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 16 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 17 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 18 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 19 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 20 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 21 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 22 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 23 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 24 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 25 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 26 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 27 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 28 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 29 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 30 }, ], "nicehash_nonce" : true, I haven't tinkered with anything else other than point the pool/wallet details at my NiceHash account. The cpu is pegged at 100%. NiceHash says I am getting 0.27 kH/s, which doesn't feel like much. The hashrate report says: ... [2017-09-25 21:27:41] : New block detected. [2017-09-25 21:28:18] : Result accepted by the pool. HASHRATE REPORT | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | | 0 | (na) | 10.5 | 10.4 | 1 | 10.7 | 10.7 | 10.8 | | 2 | 10.2 | 9.9 | 10.0 | 3 | 10.8 | 10.6 | 10.6 | | 4 | (na) | 10.3 | 10.2 | 5 | (na) | 10.6 | 10.6 | | 6 | (na) | 10.8 | 10.8 | 7 | 10.6 | 10.8 | 10.7 | | 8 | 10.8 | 10.6 | 10.5 | 9 | (na) | 10.7 | 10.7 | | 10 | (na) | 11.0 | 10.8 | 11 | (na) | 11.0 | 10.8 | | 12 | 9.2 | 8.8 | 9.7 | 13 | 10.3 | 10.6 | 10.8 | | 14 | 10.6 | 10.6 | 10.7 | 15 | (na) | 10.6 | 10.7 | | 16 | (na) | 10.4 | 10.5 | 17 | (na) | 10.7 | 10.8 | | 18 | (na) | 10.8 | 10.8 | 19 | 10.6 | 10.8 | 10.7 | | 20 | (na) | 9.9 | 9.9 | 21 | 10.4 | 10.4 | 10.5 | | 22 | 10.7 | 10.7 | 10.7 | 23 | (na) | 10.7 | 10.7 | | 24 | (na) | 10.3 | 10.3 | 25 | 10.4 | 10.4 | 10.5 | | 26 | 10.8 | 10.6 | 10.6 | 27 | (na) | 10.6 | 10.6 | | 28 | (na) | 9.5 | 9.6 | 29 | (na) | 10.7 | 10.9 | | 30 | 80.9 | 82.1 | 82.2 | Totals: (na) 396.5 398.0 H/s Highest: 0.0 H/s I've seen 1204H/s being reported for a 1950x here: https://forums.servethehome.com/index.php?threads/monero-mining-performance.12116/ So, I think something is going wrong... How do we take this forward ? Jules — You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[peterjenner]

Thanks Bewinxed. I took your advice and hit a new high of 1367.1 H/s

[Pennywis3]

I have a really strange issue with my Threadripper 1950X. If im using 12 cores ( 0,2,4...22 ) everything seems to be fine, hashing about 920 - 950 stock or about 75-80 h/s a core. The moment i use 13 or more, the speed just drops down to about 15h/s on each core. I starts to act like its a 1920X. Very strange. Do you guys think this has to do with the fact i only have one 16GB ram stick? Or are the remaining 4 cores not seen right by XMR stack? Dont know what version im using, but i dont have the -notls-64 file, only the normal xmr-stak-cpu.exe.

Any suggestions? :)

[Bewinxed]

@Pennywis3 Remember that each two CPU "cores" are reserved for one Logical core, So if for example you use CPU 12 and CPU 13 remember we start counting from 0 so you're using a Logical Core + 1 Virtual Core so you're essentially using 1.5 logical core.

Always use logical cores to mine, hyperthreaded cores will slow it down significantly.

So for your case i would use 0,2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,22,24

If i'm misunderstanding or you already know this then simply reuse the blank settings and let XMR-stak generate the settings then copy them over and remove the extra cores you don't need.

Lemme know if that fixes it @Pennywis3

[Pennywis3]

Hi @Bewinxed

Thanks for you answer. I have now tried with a first start on xmr-stack and used the generated thread settings but to no avail. If i use 12 cores ( 0,2,4,6,8,10,12,14,16,18,20,22 ) its working fine, but the moment i use core 13 ( 24 ) or any core after that ( 26,28,30 ) the hash drops to 15h/s per core. Never had a CPU doing this before, im using xmr-stack on my Xeons and i7's working perfectly OK. Any chance for a TeamViewer session? :)

[Pennywis3]

Greetings, I found out what the problem was! Its the memory modules. Adding a second memory module to create dual channel fixed the problem. The threadripper is now happily hashing at 1.370h/s and the Noctua NH-U14S TR4 is doing a unbelievable job cooling it, i just can't believe the temp are so low. Thanks again for the help @Bewinxed

[kimpurcell]

Hi, I've just got my Threadripper 1950X up and running. However, I'm getting really poor hash rates like 180h/s in total (see pic).

My specs: ASRock Taichi X399 Threadripper 1950X Corsair H105 with Arctic Silver 5 Kingston HyperX Fury 16GB 2 x 8GB DDR4-2400 PC4-19200 CL15 Dual Channel Desktop Memory Kit

My xmr-stak-cpu config:

"cpu_threads_conf" : [ { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 0 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 2 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 4 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 6 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 8 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 10 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 12 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 14 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 16 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 18 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 20 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 22 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 24 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 26 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 28 }, ],

Here is my output on xmr-stak-cpu start.

---

xmr-stak-cpu 1.3.0-1.5.0 mining software, CPU Version. Based on CPU mining code by wolf9466 (heavily optimized by fireice_uk). Brought to you by fireice_uk and psychocrypt under GPLv3.

Configurable dev donation level is set to 2.0 %

You can use following keys to display reports: 'h' - hashrate 'r' - results 'c' - connection

[2017-10-21 13:20:33] : Starting single thread, affinity: 0. [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : Starting single thread, affinity: 2. [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : Starting single thread, affinity: 4. [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : Starting single thread, affinity: 6. [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : Starting single thread, affinity: 8. [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : Starting single thread, affinity: 10. [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : Starting single thread, affinity: 12. [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : Starting single thread, affinity: 14. [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : Starting single thread, affinity: 16. [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : Starting single thread, affinity: 18. [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : Starting single thread, affinity: 20. [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : Starting single thread, affinity: 22. [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : Starting single thread, affinity: 24. [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : Starting single thread, affinity: 26. [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : Starting single thread, affinity: 28. [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : Connecting to pool xmr-usa.dwarfpool.com:8005 ... [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : Connected. Logging in... [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : Difficulty changed. Now: 20000. [2017-10-21 13:20:33] : New block detected.

[kimpurcell]

I tested with 8 cores and it works. As soon as i get past that, hash rates go down...

[psychocrypt]

Do you have two memory modules in your system?

[kimpurcell]

Yes, I have only 2 memory modules. Weird that half of it is reserved by the hardware, whatever that means?

[peterjenner]

I'm not sure if this make a difference but you seem to be missing: { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 30 }, from your "cpu_threads_conf". I think that's the only difference to my setup. I'm running quad channel memory but that shouldn't affect it.

[kimpurcell]

peterjenner, I left one core out so that my comp doesn't freeze since I use it for surfing the web, etc. Maybe the quad channel memory is the reason? Could also be the ASRock TaiChi X399 board. I've had nothing but problems with this board - getting C0 memory faults in the beginning when I had both sticks on one side of the CPU (which was what the manual told me to do if I had 2 DIMMs). Well, I managed to get it to post if I had one DIMM for each side.

[Bewinxed]

It means the DIMMS are not installed properly, I had that mistake too, read the manual again and check the shape of the cpu block, the RAM should be on the right of the cpu.

After that you'll have 16gb to yourself.

On Sat, Oct 21, 2017, 10:38 PM kimpurcell notifications@github.com wrote:

Yes, I have only 2 memory modules. Weird that half of it is reserved by the hardware, whatever that means?

[image: screen shot 2017-10-21 at 3 37 10 pm] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/17389179/31855682-cf873e1e-b675-11e7-86b0-00ba42ccf5c8.png

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/fireice-uk/xmr-stak-cpu/issues/299#issuecomment-338430796, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIuOhahU-TinUJeyMLzxqq-z9Paw1MC_ks5sulY6gaJpZM4PDlrb .

[kimpurcell]

I tried moving it to the bottom side (from my pic). Any dual config seem to cause a C0.

Interestingly enough, I follwed Bewinxed's suggestion to move it to the right (top) side. It posts after a few reboots.

However, Windows still says half of it is reserved:

[Bewinxed]

Can't see the pic due to bad internet.

I have the X399 taichi

Start counting from the right, your modules should be on the 1st one then the 3rd one, reset your BIOS and then start it.

It does the reboots to "calibrate" the modules.

Then go into bios and enable xmp

Should do the trick.

On Sat, Oct 21, 2017, 11:59 PM kimpurcell notifications@github.com wrote:

I tried moving it to the bottom side (from my pic). Any dual config seem to cause a C0.

[image: img_4979] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/17389179/31856197-ea62296e-b680-11e7-8a9c-84f96b3bb8c2.JPG [image: img_4978] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/17389179/31856198-ec7f3c6e-b680-11e7-876a-13009fcb0f66.JPG

Interestingly enough, I follwed Bewinxed's suggestion to move it to the right (top) side. It posts after a few reboots.

[image: img_4981] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/17389179/31856200-f1a270da-b680-11e7-88b9-576cbc48bc93.JPG

However, Windows still says half of it is reserved:

[image: screen shot 2017-10-21 at 4 59 02 pm] https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/17389179/31856208-3039ff84-b681-11e7-8717-a17ba13e9f9c.png

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/fireice-uk/xmr-stak-cpu/issues/299#issuecomment-338435342, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIuOheuOeaJenCzXhDbTInMRK7vhLIlUks5sumk_gaJpZM4PDlrb .

[peterjenner]

kimpurcell If you look at your resource monitor (get to it from task manager) you will notice that xmr-stak-cpu-notls only uses 8 cores but uses 2 threads per core. Yours will be using 15 threads rather than 16. There is lots of overhead for your other computer tasks. I can get plenty done while the miner is running and still usually only have 60-65% total CPU usage even with a dozen chrome tabs and GIMP open. Having said that, 8.1.GB of hardware reserved memory is huge. My system only has 106MB hardware reserved memory.

[peterjenner]

Here's an article that may be helpful. http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-1694156/hardware-reserved-ram-8gb.html

[kimpurcell]

@Bewinxed, I installed the modules on 1 and 3 from the right (DIMM_A2, B2) and I get the C0 fault on the TaiChi. So I tried using one stick of 16GB from Crucial:

Crucial Ballistix Sport LT 16GB DDR4-2400 PC4-19200 CL16 Dual Channel Desktop Memory Kit

Filling any of the slots DIMM_A1, A2, B1, B2 would cause the C0 fault.

So I put it in D1 and it worked.

Now I have 16GB of usable RAM.

Per the article from @peterjenner, I think these Kingston FuryX memory modules are not compatible or is defective. Maybe that's the problem. Bought them from MicroCenter, will be returning them tomorrow.

That's the good news. The bad news is that xmr-stak-cpu still doesn't perform well with all 16 cores. Previously I used 9-10 cores and I get 800-900 H/s. When I use all 16, I get 180 H/s max. Here's my updated config:

{ "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 0}, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 2 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 4 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 6 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 8 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 10 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 12 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 14 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 16 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 18 }, { "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 20 },
{ "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 22 },
{ "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 24 },
{ "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 26 },
{ "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 28 },
{ "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 30 },

Here's what I get :

System :

@peterjenner - In my previous config, I was using 15 threads, so maybe xmr-stak-cpu is not recognizing the full 16 cores? Or do I have a defective CPU?

CPU-Z seems about right?

[kimpurcell]

So I was thinking maybe some of my cores are bad. I tried with the following config: "cpu_threads_conf" : [

{ "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 22 },
{ "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 24 },
{ "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 26 },
{ "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 28 },
{ "low_power_mode" : false, "no_prefetch" : true, "affine_to_cpu" : 30 },
],

They seem to work fine:

---

xmr-stak-cpu 1.3.0-1.5.0 mining software, CPU Version. Based on CPU mining code by wolf9466 (heavily optimized by fireice_uk). Brought to you by fireice_uk and psychocrypt under GPLv3.

Configurable dev donation level is set to 2.0 %

You can use following keys to display reports: 'h' - hashrate 'r' - results 'c' - connection

[2017-10-22 01:04:40] : Starting single thread, affinity: 22. [2017-10-22 01:04:40] : Starting single thread, affinity: 24. [2017-10-22 01:04:40] : Starting single thread, affinity: 26. [2017-10-22 01:04:40] : Starting single thread, affinity: 28. [2017-10-22 01:04:40] : Starting single thread, affinity: 30. [2017-10-22 01:04:40] : Connecting to pool xmr-usa.dwarfpool.com:8005 ... [2017-10-22 01:04:40] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-22 01:04:40] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-22 01:04:40] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-22 01:04:40] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-22 01:04:40] : hwloc: memory pinned [2017-10-22 01:04:40] : Connected. Logging in... [2017-10-22 01:04:40] : Difficulty changed. Now: 20000. [2017-10-22 01:04:40] : New block detected. HASHRATE REPORT | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | | 0 | (na) | (na) | (na) | 1 | (na) | (na) | (na) | | 2 | (na) | (na) | (na) | 3 | (na) | (na) | (na) | | 4 | (na) | (na) | (na) |

Totals: (na) (na) (na) H/s Highest: 0.0 H/s HASHRATE REPORT | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | | 0 | 87.9 | (na) | (na) | 1 | 83.6 | (na) | (na) | | 2 | 83.3 | (na) | (na) | 3 | 83.5 | (na) | (na) | | 4 | 83.5 | (na) | (na) |

Totals: 421.7 (na) (na) H/s Highest: 0.0 H/s HASHRATE REPORT | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | | 0 | 88.4 | (na) | (na) | 1 | 83.8 | (na) | (na) | | 2 | 84.1 | (na) | (na) | 3 | 84.1 | (na) | (na) | | 4 | 84.1 | (na) | (na) |

Totals: 424.4 (na) (na) H/s Highest: 420.9 H/s HASHRATE REPORT | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | | 0 | 88.4 | (na) | (na) | 1 | 83.8 | (na) | (na) | | 2 | 84.1 | (na) | (na) | 3 | 84.1 | (na) | (na) | | 4 | 84.1 | (na) | (na) |

Totals: 424.4 (na) (na) H/s Highest: 420.9 H/s HASHRATE REPORT | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | ID | 2.5s | 60s | 15m | | 0 | 88.4 | (na) | (na) | 1 | 84.0 | (na) | (na) | | 2 | 83.8 | (na) | (na) | 3 | 84.0 | (na) | (na) | | 4 | 84.0 | (na) | (na) |

Totals: 424.1 (na) (na) H/s Highest: 420.9 H/s

My CPU usage from HWINFO64

[kimpurcell]

Just read @Pennywis3 issue. I'm having the same issue! :-(

So I just need to add a second module that works. At least that helped fix @Pennywis3 's issue. @Pennywis3, could you share what your memory configuration is pls?

I've ordered the following memory: G.SKILL TridentZ Series 16GB (2 x 8GB) 288-Pin DDR4 SDRAM DDR4 4266 (PC4 34100) Memory (Desktop Memory) Model F4-4266C19D-16GTZA

It's in the X399 TaiChi QVL list, getting it Tuesday. Apparently, it's a Samsung BDie (will confirm). Hope it works!

[peterjenner]

I have a different mother board to you (X399 GAMING PRO CARBON AC) but in the manual it says that if you are running two DIMMS you should use D2 and B2.

[Bewinxed]

I have the Taichi and i'm using the TridentZ, It's compatible and it's a samsung B-Die should work well :)

[kimpurcell]

So I think I have a bad X399 ASRock TaiChi board.

I tested a different memory stick, slowly trying each DIMM slot. A1, A2, B1, B2, C1, C2. Each one fails with a C0.

I finally put it in D1. It worked and boots up. Took that out of D1 and into D2 - that worked as well. So now I have both sticks in D1 and D2.

But that hadn't improved my hash rates on xmr-stak-cpu. Same issue as before. Probably because my memory is not running in dual channel mode?

[Bewinxed]

I think it won't work well unless it's in A2, B2, that's what the manual says.

Otherwise you might have incompatible memory, did you update your BIOS?

[kimpurcell]

@Bewinxed @peterjenner thanks for your help! I'll let you know how it goes with the TridentZ. I think I'm going to get C0 on that one as well, which at that point will just get the board replaced.

Thanks!

@Bewinxed you're right, it didn't help with the hash rates. I have the most up-to-date BIOS (v1.70)

[Bewinxed]

@kimpurcell check this http://forum.asrock.com/forum_posts.asp?TID=5905&PN=2&title=x399-c0-error-code

apparently c0 is related too to PSU wires, do you have all of them connected?

[peterjenner]

@kimpurcell No worries, glad to try and help. BTW, on a completely different subject (sorry admins) how do you find that Corsair cooler? I'm running the H100i V2 and the reason I ask is, i just went out for 8 hours and left the miner running and had inadvertently left a Verium miner running as well. I was using 100% CPU for 8 hours and the CPU temp (according to Corsair Link) only got to 52 deg C. I was amazed.

[kimpurcell]

@Bewinxed yup, I have two connectors (1x4pin,1x8pin) to the mobo in addition to the 24-pin. Running on a 850w EVGA G3 with Eco mode off.

@peterjenner the H105 works pretty well. I’m at 51deg right now after a few hours of running. Here’s a snapshot:

[Pennywis3]

@kimpurcell

Hi dude, this is my setup, if it will help.

ASUS MB PRIME X399-A AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X NOCTUA NH-U14S TR4-SP3 CRUCIAL 16GB DDR4 2666 CL16 1.2V DIMM Ballistix Sport LT ANTEC P380 full tower ASUS ROG Strix Radeon RX 580 OC 8GB GDDR5 AURA CORSAIR RM1000x 1000W 80Plus Gold

I made a mistake when i bought the memory, thinking its 2x8Gb, but i got 1x16Gb instead. So i read the manual ( which you can find here: https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/PRIME-X399-A/HelpDesk_Manual/ ) and put the single 16Gb memory into slot DIMM_C1 as recommended by the manual. Only 12 cores seemed to be hashing, so i pulled another 16Gb single stick from an i7 machine and put it into DIMM_A1 slot as recommended by the manual and all 16 cores started working normal. I'm afraid i can't tell you what make is the other ram module, as the machine is at work, sry bout that, but the Crucial ballistix sport LT are compatible.

[kimpurcell]

@Bewinxed were you able to get your ram to work at quad channel 3600mhz on the X399 TaiChi?

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232471

[kimpurcell]

@Bewinxed I'm contemplating either getting the 4266-GTZA or the new Flare-X for quad channel:

https://www.gskill.com/en/product/f4-3200c14q-32gfx

any thoughts?

[Bewinxed]

I only have 2 modules, I see no need in overclocking the ram beyond 3200

On Mon, Oct 30, 2017, 2:48 AM kimpurcell notifications@github.com wrote:

@Bewinxed https://github.com/bewinxed were you able to get your ram to work at quad channel 3600mhz on the X399 TaiChi?

https://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820232471

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/fireice-uk/xmr-stak-cpu/issues/299#issuecomment-340323020, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AIuOhTUvpltDw6Y5iC5UtoaOZnUoo0Gmks5sxSrsgaJpZM4PDlrb .

[kimpurcell]

Just to give y'all an update - I received a replacement X399 TaiChi motherboard. Inserted my Kingston FuryX CL15 2400 memory modules on C1 and C3, and the board booted up perfectly. No issues whatsoever. Overclocked the 1950x to 4 Ghz, achieved 1425 H/s hash rates.

CPU Temps run about 85 degrees celcius on hwinfo64. Is that a safe temp for a 1950x?

[Bewinxed]

I wouldn’t keep a thread ripper mining with that temperature, but keep in mind that the true temperature on threadripper is minus -27 celsius from what it’s currently reporting, it’s done to keep a consisten fan policy between all ryzen processors, check this article for explanation http://www.guru3d.com/articles-pages/amd-ryzen-threadripper-1950x-review,8.html

What cooler are you using?

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: kimpurcell Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 4:47 PM To: fireice-uk/xmr-stak-cpu Cc: Bewinxed; Mention Subject: Re: [fireice-uk/xmr-stak-cpu] Optimization for AMD Threadripper 1950X(#299)

Just to give y'all an update - I received a replacement X399 TaiChi motherboard. Inserted my Kingston FuryX CL15 2400 memory modules on C1 and C3, and the board booted up perfectly. No issues whatsoever. Overclocked the 1950x to 4 Ghz, achieved 1425 H/s hash rates. CPU Temps run about 85 degrees celcius on hwinfo64. Is that a safe temp for a 1950x?

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[kimpurcell]

@Bewinxed I'm using the Corsair H105 with Arctic Silver thermal paste... Is that too high? Should I reapply the paste?

[Bewinxed]

Yeah look it up on youtube and try again.

I’m at 80 somethhing on a noctua fan cooler.

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: kimpurcell Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 5:58 PM To: fireice-uk/xmr-stak-cpu Cc: Bewinxed; Mention Subject: Re: [fireice-uk/xmr-stak-cpu] Optimization for AMD Threadripper 1950X(#299)

@Bewinxed I'm using the Corsair H105 with Arctic Silver thermal paste... Is that too high? Should I reapply the paste? — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[kimpurcell]

Thanks @Bewinxed.

Btw, seems Ryzen Master shows the "true" temp after offset. I'm at 54.88 degrees celcius.

[Bewinxed]

I’ll check my temps in a bit and report back, cause I need to reboot for some reason.

Sent from Mail for Windows 10

From: kimpurcell Sent: Saturday, November 4, 2017 6:14 PM To: fireice-uk/xmr-stak-cpu Cc: Bewinxed; Mention Subject: Re: [fireice-uk/xmr-stak-cpu] Optimization for AMD Threadripper 1950X(#299)

Thanks @Bewinxed. Btw, seems Ryzen Master shows the "true" temp after offset. I'm at 54.88 degrees celcius.

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

[peterjenner]

Here's mine. I'm not a big fan of Arctic Silver. I'm using Noctua NT-H1. Mine's probably cooler because of the lower clock speed.

[kimpurcell]

@peterjenner that's pretty cool. I overclocked mine to 1.3v @ 4Ghz though, that's why it's running hotter than usual. Yes, I reapplied the Arctic Silver and got even worse results (now at 58 tDie temps). I'm planning to replace it with the Arctic MX-4 Thermal Paste. Probably bundle it with the Arctic Silver Arcticlean Thermal material Remover.

[peterjenner]

Or just use isopropyl alcohol.