Check you clock speeds after CudaMiner errors out. When I get errors out of CudaMiner, my GPU goes to "2D" clocks and gets locked there. Another way to get out of that mess is to launch Device Manager and then disable and re-enable the offending GPU.

My nVidia Optimus laptop (Intel + GT630M) works fine with -d 0. There's a couple things you could try:
- The GPGPU stuff (F@H, mining) did not work unless I installed an up-to-date INTEL driver first, and the nVidia driver second. You should make sure both are up to date.
- Make sure the nVidia control panel actually shows your driver version number under Help->System Information. (if not, then something is wrong with your drivers)
- You should be able to right-click on the shortcut to Cudaminer (NOT a batch file) and select "Run with graphics processor" -> "nVidia". Note however I don't have to do this for mining, but I used to have to do it for Folding@Home.

@wakexd - wrong wiki (that's Sha256) use the Google Spreadsheets in the first post instead - even litecoin wiki's numbers are outdated for cudaminer


Yep exactly - just change the URL. Note CoinEx has different ports for each coin - e.g. FST is 9000, IFC is 9003, etc.
One note about CoinEx vs other pools is that they do worker names differently. See their little support link at that's a little hard to get to: https://coinex.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/201894028-What-workername-do-i-use-to-mine-on-CoinEX-Pools-

Hmm looks like the upgrade did something good. This is the first time I was able to connect a miner to them since the introduction of their auto-switch pool

A GTX 660 should be good for >180 kHash with the new cudaminer: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=167229.0
See the Google doc linked in that post for some custom tweaking settings.

I think you already have the CPU mining thing figured out - use your CPUs on coins that GPU, FPGA, and ASIC are not good at. No one knows which one of the CPU only coins will survive, and just like Scrypt coins I'm sure the most profitable coin bounces around every hour. (I'm sure a bunch of people are running scripts that change what their CPU is pointed at depending on profit calculators, similar to the auto-switch scrypt pools.)

I'm personally using my CPUs on World Community Grid for the Ripple Labs XRP giveaway - probably not as profitable as CPU coins but more useful use of compute in my mind + the BOINC client is more reliable than any miner out there.

This is all I get (cudaminer and tried cpu miner just for fun), so I'd say not just you

Anyone know what the "MOO" coin is?


I can't find it on Cryptocointalk or Google searching of this forum (even after excluding the very similarly named coin with an "n" on the end).
It's fitting anyway for the name of the pool 

Thanks for the quick reply!

I found the issue - it is that p2pool doesn't like the max connections setting...
I have it connecting to a local novacoin-qt now with the following novacoin.conf

Is the p2pool software incompatible with the current version of novacoin or something?

Running the p2pool gives me this:
(and it stalls here)

I'm running p2pool 11.4.3 and novacoind 0.4.4.6, both compiled from github / running on Ubuntu 13.04

Is there an issue with the Round Shares Accepted (Adj) and Round Shares Rejected (Adj) in the workers page?

The only worker that has a nonzero value for those is the first one (youraccount.1). I set up 2 other workers, and while they showed a proper hashrate estimate, the Round Shares columns stayed at zero after leaving 1 mining for a day and another for 8 hours. Anyway, I'm moving my miners back to the first worker until that issue gets cleared up.

eoDaM8VpLhXoHLEazef1fWXDwPukrBFB2B

Thanks!

If the motherboards beep when you have a monitor, and they don't beep without a monitor, don't bother reading further

Hmm motherboards sometimes want you to press a key if there's an "error", and lacking a keyboard or monitor usually counts as an error. Also, are you sure it's a the monitor and not the keyboard?
Hmm my ASUS Maximus V GENE has an option in BIOS called "Wait for 'F1' if error". If you have something similar you can try turning it off and see what happens.

For cudaminer I found the 32-bit version to actually be faster than the 64. (This is with the binary however, I'm not sure about the operating system.)
I don't know what it's like on the AMD side of things.

Aha! It's all in the settings...

Using the following:
cudaminer -i 0 -C 1 -H 1 -o stratum.... -O ....

--- the result is

To get this result, I also had to stop mining on the CPU, since CPU usage is over 50% of 2 cores with that setup. My setup is a GV-N550OC-1GI at its factory overclock running on a lowly AMD 5200+ / Asus M2AVM / 6GB. (Ubuntu 13.04 with the kernel 3.12 .DEBs stolen from "trusty"'s archive)

FYI for giggles, I got an 8400M GS going with these settings:
...for an amazing 0.9 kHash/second   Also if you value your laptop you shouldn't use that GPU for mining. Search for "Nvidia G84/G86 Chips Defective" to see what I mean.



Odd I'm only getting 74 kHash/sec on a 550 Ti hosted on Linux. Then again it may be because I have it running attached to motherboard so old it has DDR2-667 and PCI-E 1.1...

I think AMD's still better, but the gap is a lot smaller than it used to be.
For instance my 660 Ti's 230ish khash puts in it in Radeon 7790, or 6850 territory. Both cards are usually cheaper than a 660Ti and they draw less power. That claim on 650 kHash from a 780Ti puts that card very close to a 7950. However, again the 7950 can be had for less, and it draws less power.

Ref:
https://litecoin.info/Mining_hardware_comparison
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=167229.msg4028914#msg4028914
http://www.anandtech.com/show/7492/the-geforce-gtx-780-ti-review/15

Theoretically, I think the R9 still has the advantage even with the price differential. However, all of this is prototype code (I'm talking about both the AMD and the nVidia miners here), so more software optimization or driver updates on either end would blow the gates wide open.

Thanks for putting it together! (Also thanks to C. Buchner for somehow integrating it into Cudaminer so fast.)

I compiled from source on Visual Studio 2012, and I do indeed get the speedup from ~160 kHash/Sec to ~230kHash/sec on my card:

(BTW I also compiled it just fine with the VS 2012 toolchain - no change from the 2010 in terms of performance.)

This is on a "stock" eVGA 660 Ti. (There was never a "reference" 660Ti, but my card is clocked the same as what is shown on nVidia's web site.) My settings are as follows:
Cudaminer settings: Running the 32-bits cudaminer, -d 0 -i 0 -C 2 -H 2 -l K14x14
CPU: Intel Core i5 2500k OC @ 4.3 GHz, 3 other threads doing CPU mining
Motherboard: ASUS Maximus V GENE
RAM: 8 GB DDR3-1866 @ 9-10-9-27
HDDs: (A low-performance mess - you don't want to know.)
OS: Windows 8.1 Pro 64 bit


My display runs on a GeForce 8500 GT while the 660 Ti does all the work. Yes - it surprises me I'm not getting random crashes by running cards that are ~5 generations apart.

As I'm in cryptocoins for fun and not for profit, I'd like to take a crack at improving this over the Christmas holiday:
I know the keplerminer code wasn't designed for Compute Capability 2.0, but I'm sure I can think of something. I dabbled in FPGA accelerators a couple years ago, so this should be fun.

[/s]

Hmm I just looked at the code and it looks like the newest revision also implemented the changes for the other versions of the CUDA cards... I still want to get in to GPU or other parallel stuff to keep my head sharp on the topic, so maybe I'll give it another look over anyway. ...if I had access to my old hardware lab I'd try FPGAs, but oh well...

Not necessarily: Check out a good review and look at the efficiency curve of a PSU. Normally they're the most efficient (least wasted energy) at about 50% of their rated load. If you get a 1200W PSU for instance, you may get less efficiency because you're not drawing enough.

When you're counting energy consumption over several months of mining as part of your calculation for profit, every percentage point counts! If your plan is to buy more cards later, that may be a different story. However, I have never done my "upgrade plan" exactly as I thought.

I always go for the reviews to see what kind of power consumption I can expect:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/radeon-r9-270-review-benchmarks,3669-9.html

One card on its own seems to draw a bit less than 150W (which makes sense given the one PCI-E connector). Therefore with 2 cards, you're looking at 300W. Add an overclocked CPU and other stuff gets you at still less than 500W. Therefore, in my opinion, no, you do not need a 1000W power supply. However, you still want a GOOD power supply, not the 250W PSU that claims to be a 600W PSU.