Search content
Sort by
Showing 20 of 37 results by renedx
Normally when people make a Windows binary like this they just make an empty Github project with a README so they can stick the .exe as a Github release. We saw this in sp-mod and honestly it was annoying as hell.
It’s pretty sad people ask me to run crap like that. I’ve no idea what I’m running without source code. I’m honestly blown away this is even allowed on this forum.
renedx // hi, dont have a windows could you send me the source so can compile for linux on R TX 3000 cards thanks 
The zip doesn’t contain a source sadly enough.
https://github.com/richieburns/BitCrack_AMP/releases/download/v1.0.0_AMP/BitCrack_AMP.zip
Bitcrack CUDA 11.2 Compute 8.6 Win10
Would appreciate some benchmarks for RTX 30 series cards.....
Cheers
Bitcrack CUDA 11.2 Compute 8.6 Win10
Would appreciate some benchmarks for RTX 30 series cards.....
Cheers
Works, 3080 without OC does ~1800MKey/s.
Old bitcrack CL does ~1650MKey/s.
We already incurred a speed penalty just to make it work for RTX cards and the last thing everyone needs is a even slower program just to get it to run on Linux.
Then you are doing something wrong.
My first RTX 3060 card has arrived and I will make a fix in bitcrack sp-mod #6 (windows) with fullspeed wine support.
spminer #2 for vertcoin has already been released with rtx 3060 support. Mine fullspeed on x1 riser cables and latest drivers without NVIDIA blocking you.
Any updates?
Well boys, I think I may have just fixed RTX 30xx compatibility
No debug switch used - speed is awful because I'm using tiny -t -p and -b settings. I didn't want to wait several minutes to see if it worked.
That being said, there's no optimization in this program either. I guess the optimization was too aggressive and it broke things. Maybe I will inch it up a few increments to see the highest that'll work without crashing.
Code and benchmarks tomorrow - I'm dead tired now.
No debug switch used - speed is awful because I'm using tiny -t -p and -b settings. I didn't want to wait several minutes to see if it worked.
That being said, there's no optimization in this program either. I guess the optimization was too aggressive and it broke things. Maybe I will inch it up a few increments to see the highest that'll work without crashing.
Code and benchmarks tomorrow - I'm dead tired now.
Amazing job sir. A hero we all needed within this chaos.
Optimize can’t be set per file base? Split the code that can’t be optimized?
Can’t wait to see this.
I discovered that it's actually the Link Time Optimization (-dlto switch) that nvcc is doing to the object code that's the culprit and messing with CUDA API functions, which is also the reason why linking takes so long, and that this feature is turned off while using the debugging switch -G. Unfortunately there is no switch that turns it off, but it shouldn't be too bad because I can successfully reproduce the bug with -b 1 -t 32 -p 1 (the threads absolutely have to be a multiple of 32 or else the program will complain).
Isn't this the same thing as for Legacy Mode execution? Would at least explain why legacy was running (just horribly slow).
Hang on, I'm zoning in on the error. It appears to be returned from a CUDA API function so that's some good news
This issue is also reproducible on RTX 20 cards.
I'm currently busy strapping all the API calls with printf's after the error checks are triggered to see which one it is.
Cool! Hopefully your printfs do not slow it down too much causing it to work. That was our biggest pain in the .........
I've been checking our discord, but there is really nothing you didn't already know/ran into it.
Doesn't work. The 30 series problem is code related, not a PTX compile issue.
I will receive my first 30 series card in a week or so. Will fix then.
Awesome, would you mind sharing what the fix if you get it fixed? As we noobs been trying for a while
All four mods are not working in 30 series GPUs 
waiting for your 5th mod
waiting for your 5th mod Can you try #5? Does it work?
Doesn't work. The 30 series problem is code related, not a PTX compile issue.
@NotATether
Noted, I still remember these cons as something I was debugging dead on. I’m really a data-driven debugger, without memory access and lack of in-depth knowledge of CUDA, data is the only way I would be able to track logic.
3:30 here, so I’ll take a look tomorrow maybe something I’ll hit that helps anyone along too.
Just curious, why bitcrack? If you want to improve upon anything, I would suggest to look at VanitySearch. It already handles multi GPU and is faster. The issue is reading full address, but works with partial/strings. It already does what bitcrack does, and faster, just full address issue.
Just a question.
Personally tried, but same problem with bitcrack, debugging without memory access makes this a really difficult one. I personally found the bitcrack code easier to understand & follow, the vanity one makes me feel like I’m trying to debug professor code. But that’s just personal taste. Besides bitcrack has already built in keyspacing, but vanity can be modified to do so if needed.
I’m kinda convinced if we would be able to *understand* what makes ampere cards crash on bitcrack, you could prob. fix vanity too.
Noted, I still remember these cons as something I was debugging dead on. I’m really a data-driven debugger, without memory access and lack of in-depth knowledge of CUDA, data is the only way I would be able to track logic.
3:30 here, so I’ll take a look tomorrow maybe something I’ll hit that helps anyone along too.
Quote
I decided after my contracted Kangaroo work is done (it's almost complete) I'm going to make a better Bitcrack. No point in me holding the source also or instead of trying to solve puzzles we spend ~3 pages of threads arguing about source code distribution.
Just curious, why bitcrack? If you want to improve upon anything, I would suggest to look at VanitySearch. It already handles multi GPU and is faster. The issue is reading full address, but works with partial/strings. It already does what bitcrack does, and faster, just full address issue.
Just a question.
Personally tried, but same problem with bitcrack, debugging without memory access makes this a really difficult one. I personally found the bitcrack code easier to understand & follow, the vanity one makes me feel like I’m trying to debug professor code. But that’s just personal taste. Besides bitcrack has already built in keyspacing, but vanity can be modified to do so if needed.
I’m kinda convinced if we would be able to *understand* what makes ampere cards crash on bitcrack, you could prob. fix vanity too.
For the #39, it took the 1060 6GB card exactly 44 seconds to find the key. Start to finish = 44 seconds, with 1 card. Grid size of 3072x512.
sp, is 44 seconds good on an old 1060 card?
sp, is 44 seconds good on an old 1060 card?
No it is slow. should run under 100ms. You can retrieve the precalculated keys from https://privatekeys.pw/ . Since the answer to the puzzle is already known and can be precalculated.
Back to the speed of my bitcrack implementation.
puzzle 39: 2^39 = 549 755 813 888 possible combinations
with a speed of 400 000 000 (400MKeys)
puzzle #38: 274 877 906 944 / 400 000 000 = 1374 seconds (around 12minutes)
puzzle #39: 549 755 813 888 / 400 000 000 = 1374 seconds (around 23minutes)
With 400mkeys and solving puzzle 39 You would expect the program to spend 12-23 minutes. The hashes used to find the solution is printed in the miner window and the speed can easily be verified. Bitcrack sp-mod is working. I see that my fanclub is present already. I welcome you all. Go crack some keys.
The next version will come with more speed.
Fan club present? Are you referring to the program and you’re able to see who’s running it?
Quote
Even if he is able to 2x the openCL speed on the Ampere cards, it would take my spare -/+20 cards 74 days to crack 10% of the puzzle 64. Could be enough, but prob. still would take a lot of time.
Btw _sp
I can remote access you a RTX card if it helps
Btw _sp
I can remote access you a RTX card if it helps
Ha...ha...ha...unless I am reading what you are saying wrong. You have 20 cards, round about 20? And you think you would crack 10%? The pool has been running pretty non stop for over a year. With Zielar's big push at times with 256 to 512 V100, and they are barely above 10%. Yes. 256 up to 512 V100s at times...over a year running, and barely above 10%.
You're right, I didn't modify the suspected keyspace we ran. My bad. In that case, its gonna be a long bumpy ride
No viruses found in my bitcrack exe files.
#1
https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/a14fe7162c8a649470325fbaffbc1647e97be3b3084a4127165a923149f18dd5/detection
#2
https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/8fff68b00a45289b5b4493ffaa3e5d4bbefb646ca19c2eb9e4b4e3c4e2f6a765/detection
I have sent you the file to test, but nobody has reported the speed yet. #2 Should work on the gtx 750ti from 2014 and newer nvidia gpu's
Some pascal results (compressed):
gtx 1050: 50 Mkey (laptop?)
gtx 1070: 370 MKey
gtx 1070ti: 404Mkey
gtx 1080ti: 600Mkey
Titanx pascal: 560Mkey
The original bitcrack does 9.4 Mkey on the (GeForce GT 640) . So the 1080ti with the sp-mod #2 is 63 times faster.
#1
https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/a14fe7162c8a649470325fbaffbc1647e97be3b3084a4127165a923149f18dd5/detection
#2
https://www.virustotal.com/gui/file/8fff68b00a45289b5b4493ffaa3e5d4bbefb646ca19c2eb9e4b4e3c4e2f6a765/detection
I have sent you the file to test, but nobody has reported the speed yet. #2 Should work on the gtx 750ti from 2014 and newer nvidia gpu's
Some pascal results (compressed):
gtx 1050: 50 Mkey (laptop?)
gtx 1070: 370 MKey
gtx 1070ti: 404Mkey
gtx 1080ti: 600Mkey
Titanx pascal: 560Mkey
The original bitcrack does 9.4 Mkey on the (GeForce GT 640) . So the 1080ti with the sp-mod #2 is 63 times faster.
Will test.
3090:
Quote
Bitcrack sp-mod #2 (https://github.com/sp-hash)
[2021-03-23.01:06:51] [Info] Compression: compressed
[2021-03-23.01:06:51] [Info] Starting at: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001
[2021-03-23.01:06:51] [Info] Ending at: FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEBAAEDCE6AF48A03BBFD25E8CD0364140
[2021-03-23.01:06:51] [Info] Counting by: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001
[2021-03-23.01:06:51] [Info] Initializing GeForce RTX 3090
[2021-03-23.01:07:02] [Info] Generating 171,966,464 starting points (1640.0MB)
[2021-03-23.01:07:26] [Info] 10.0%
[2021-03-23.01:07:27] [Info] 20.0%
[2021-03-23.01:07:27] [Info] 30.0%
[2021-03-23.01:07:27] [Info] 40.0%
[2021-03-23.01:07:28] [Info] 50.0%
[2021-03-23.01:07:28] [Info] 60.0%
[2021-03-23.01:07:28] [Info] 70.0%
[2021-03-23.01:07:29] [Info] 80.0%
[2021-03-23.01:07:29] [Info] 90.0%
[2021-03-23.01:07:30] [Info] 100.0%
[2021-03-23.01:07:30] [Info] Done
Quote
Bitcrack sp-mod #2 (https://github.com/sp-hash)
[2021-03-23.01:10:01] [Info] Compression: compressed
[2021-03-23.01:10:01] [Info] Starting at: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001
[2021-03-23.01:10:01] [Info] Ending at: FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFEBAAEDCE6AF48A03BBFD25E8CD0364140
[2021-03-23.01:10:01] [Info] Counting by: 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001
[2021-03-23.01:10:01] [Info] Initializing GeForce RTX 3090
[2021-03-23.01:10:01] [Info] Generating 171,966,464 starting points (1640.0MB)
[2021-03-23.01:10:27] [Info] 10.0%
[2021-03-23.01:10:28] [Info] 20.0%
[2021-03-23.01:10:28] [Info] 30.0%
[2021-03-23.01:10:29] [Info] 40.0%
[2021-03-23.01:10:29] [Info] 50.0%
[2021-03-23.01:10:29] [Info] 60.0%
[2021-03-23.01:10:30] [Info] 70.0%
[2021-03-23.01:10:30] [Info] 80.0%
[2021-03-23.01:10:31] [Info] 90.0%
[2021-03-23.01:10:31] [Info] 100.0%
[2021-03-23.01:10:31] [Info] Done
[2021-03-23.01:10:32] [Info] Error: misaligned address
Execution time = 31 seconds
Same problem, it sometimes throws error, sometimes stays stuck on Done depends on the ampere mood.
Regarding the sp-mod, your V2 link has a Trojan in it per Win10 findings (conteban).
Your V1 doesn’t run on ampere. 3060, 3070, 3080 or 3090.
Your V1 doesn’t run on ampere. 3060, 3070, 3080 or 3090.
I don't think it has malware. Anti-viruses are known to make bullshit false flags on crypto software and miners in particular (which we'll inevitably see happening if Stratum urls and networking are added). Besides, the sp-mod commit history is on Github so if he really were up to something shady then we'd already see it by now.
Oh wasn't ment like that, I just wanted to share some people cannot open the file in the first place. I just did some quick test.
I couldn't find the commit history sadly enough? The files are empty, for me at least.
⭐ Merited by NotATether (1)
Only way you’ll see me party a pool with my GPUs is when NotATether is the only, verified, owner. Based of the open and honesty he shares in the findings and improving CUDA, it’s a no-brainer he’s here to improve everyone.
Regarding the sp-mod, your V2 link has a Trojan in it per Win10 findings (conteban).
Your V1 doesn’t run on ampere. 3060, 3070, 3080 or 3090.
Regarding the sp-mod, your V2 link has a Trojan in it per Win10 findings (conteban).
Your V1 doesn’t run on ampere. 3060, 3070, 3080 or 3090.
Not sure at what rate you're leasing a Tesla A. But isn't it cheaper to buy, for example, a 3060?
Ofc I'm not familiar with shipping and stocking in your country
Ofc I'm not familiar with shipping and stocking in your country
I'm overseas ATM so I'm in the process of leasing a custom server from walkerservers.com. They're the only guys who accept crypto and offer GPUs at the same time.
They also only have Teslas, so no GeForce or Quadro for me.
(you gotta request a quote from their sales dept for one, they aren't available in the product listings.)PPS. do not get a 3060 until someone confirms whether they throttle on these programs, that card in particular throttles itself for ethereum mining, and I have no idea if it classifies private key bruteforcing as ethereum mining, as they both use ECC, and'll throttle on these programs too.
I see, I could free up a windows desktop with a 3080 or 3070 if thats something you're willing to work with?
Would need to request and need a time-window (1 week, 2 weeks?) for it, but could work it out for free.
10xx series cards work with cubitcrack without issue, regardless of drivers.
20xx series cards work with cubitcrack, if you roll back drivers to 452.06 or 456.02 (can't remember which)
30xx series cards do not work with cubitcrack no matter the driver
Got it. Better avoid getting a Pascal or Maxwell then.
Not sure at what rate you're leasing a Tesla A. But isn't it cheaper to buy, for example, a 3060?
So apply that fix to 0.30? And the speed improvements from 0.31 is due to the fact that it's not working properly?
You can just apply it to the master branch. It will work fine.
"Fixed" clbitcrack as in using an older build like 0.30, or a fixed version of 0.31? I just tried 0.30 and while it finds all keys ok, it's about half as fast as 0.31. I have 3090's so I believe I'm stuck using clbitcrack until the misaligned address issue is fixed for these newer cards that require the newer CUDA.
https://github.com/brichard19/BitCrack/issues/256
Is the fixed I tried before and showed execution of in the above qoute.