Quote from: urizane on March 23, 2011, 06:09:48 AM

Quote from: nlai on February 12, 2011, 08:14:59 PM

Desktop:
Intel® Core i7-870 w/VT
8GB RAM
4500 khash/sec on CPU without limit
5000 khash/sec on CPU with limit to 4 cores (why is this higher?)

Give ufasoft's SSE2 miner a go. I have an i7-950 running at 3.83 GHz that can produce 18.9 Mhash/s. You should probably get somewhere in the 14.5-15.8 Mhash/s range, depending on the thermals in your case. Also, an nVidia G 310 has a really hard time post processing HD video clips, so mining isn't going to be worthwhile on this card.

Quote from: davidonpda on February 12, 2011, 08:40:24 PM

AMD Processors with 4way instructions are much more efficient than intel processors.

i7 doesn't have 8 cores. It has 4 cores with hyperthreading. This has been discussed a few times if you want more info do a search for what's out there.

Disabling hashing on the hyperthreads will increase your hash rate.

AMD vs. Intel depends on the miner you run. I know on my quad core I get roughly 16 Mhash/s at stock speeds (I'm assuming an AMD 975 BE would be somewhere in this range, as well) so be sure you use the best miner for your hardware. In my experience, disabling HyperThreading doesn't really help when running ufasoft's miner. Besides, if you set a miner up for 4 threads, Windows will do the job of parking the virtual threads unless another CPU heavy application suddenly needs them.

Quote from: Bengie on February 16, 2011, 02:47:58 PM

The i7 quad cores(8 threads) may times do out perform the sexacore AMD chips. I think what the issue may be here though, is each i7 core only has one 128bit SSE unit which is shared between both kernel threads.

You should try running an SSE miner on 4 threads and another 4 non-SSE threads. The i7 should be able to handle 4 sse and 4 fpu threads without contention.

Ehm... I guess this sounds like something you can try, but I'm under the assumption that ~~SSE2 floating point operations still utilize the FPU~~ SSE2 ALU operations utilize the same ALUs that non-SSE2 instructions would use, so running two types of miners at once would be somewhat counter-productive. Also, using ufasoft's miner, I got better results running with 8 threads over 4, but that could be limited to the i7-9xx series parts.

Quote from: dishwara on February 16, 2011, 04:57:56 PM

With 16 cores what u get is ok.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Nvidia_graphics_processing_units#GeForce_300_Series

It actually don't support opencl, even though says supports opencl 1.1
My card 9400GT has same specs & it mines only 2500 khash/s at 550MHZ & at 700MHz, mines at 3400 khash/s

So, it normal.
poclbm gives much higher rate in cuda than RPC.
Try poclbm.
http://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1334.0

Some of this seems a little off. The nVidia G 310 is a GT200 based GPU. It does in fact support both CUDA and OpenCL. If you're comfortable tweaking command line parameters, I would suggest looking into puddinpop's RPC CUDA miner as well as m0mchil's Python OpenCL miner. After tweaking paramaters, you'll probably find that, for your G 310, the CUDA miner will be about 5% faster.

Quote from: LeiKriS on March 23, 2011, 04:07:46 AM

Can you elaborate more on this? I have a problem with my CUDA program. GPU appears to be slower than CPU. I'm using GeForce 9500 GT.

Depending on the CPU, you're probably in the same boat. There isn't enough processing power on one of these lower end cards to do integer operations with any significant speed. If you have a particularly fast CPU, these GPUs aren't going to match the performance you'll get on the CPU.

EDIT: I removed references to FPUs. Hashing and FPUs shouldn't go together.

Thanks urizane for the reply. I have:

Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Duo CPU
E7500 @ 2.93 GHz
2.93 GHz, 2.00 GB of RAM

so does your statement mean that even if i use GPU but if ever I have a more powerful CPU then GPU wont beat CPU?