Open MinerGuy62 opened 3 years ago
Yes. The -2 drive should be the faster drive because it does brunt of the work in making the tables. RAM tmpfs seems to be the best -2 for speed, but I've also used a 16x 10k SAS drive raid array as -2 and NVME as -t and got 2 minute slower results than the ramdisk.
Yes. The -2 drive should be the faster drive because it does brunt of the work in making the tables. RAM tmpfs seems to be the best -2 for speed, but I've also used a 16x 10k SAS drive raid array as -2 and NVME as -t and got 2 minute slower results than the ramdisk.
how many minutes of one plot when you using ramdisk ?
With -t as NVME and -2 as tmpfs: 26 minutes. With -t as NVME and -2 as 16 drive array: 28 minutes. 2x E5 2678v3, 24 cores total.
With -t as NVME and -2 as tmpfs: 26 minutes. With -t as NVME and -2 as 16 drive array: 28 minutes. 2x E5 2678v3, 24 cores total.
With -t as NVME and -2 as RamDisk: 38 minutes with x2 intel xeon 4210 Silver Total 20 cores 40 threads. ıs that normal? I monitored that when phase 1 my cpus reach up just 2,7Ghz but their turbo mod 3,2Ghz.
What operating system, what model NVME, what -r setting, and how many buckets? I would expect faster since those newer CPUs are right around mine in terms of specs and performance.
What operating system, what model NVME, what -r setting, and how many buckets? I would expect faster since those newer CPUs are right around mine in terms of specs and performance.
-n 10 -r 40 -v 128 -u 256 -t S:\Madmax\ -2 Z:\Temp\ -d Q:\Madmax\ -p -f S: Samsung Pro 970 1TB -2: Ramdisk -d: generally 4tb hdd Operating System: Windows 10
Has anyone noticed improvement using -2?
And what is the best option for tmp2? I have 2 1TB NVME and slow 2TB NVME and I was considering using the 2TB as the tmp2 so the 1TB's can and take on the writes or the bulk of them