mersenneforum.org

mersenneforum.org (https://www.mersenneforum.org/index.php)
-   Five or Bust - The Dual Sierpinski Problem (https://www.mersenneforum.org/forumdisplay.php?f=86)
-   -   PRP discussion thread (https://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=10759)

paleseptember 2009-02-10 09:31

Ahhhh, I'm getting crazy temperatures under full load. Like >95C on all four cores. At rest they drop back down to 70C.

Am going to have to clean the case asap, and maybe consider a better CPU heatsinkfanthing.

But, as I currently have a cold/flu/death/thing, and the five minutes spent downloading, installing, and watching the temps on the programme is the longest I've been out of bed in the past eight hours, that is a thought for tomorrow, when I'm lucid and actually able to string two thoughts together in a row. And type properly.

Jeff Gilchrist 2009-02-10 16:18

[QUOTE=paleseptember;162323]Ahhhh, I'm getting crazy temperatures under full load. Like >95C on all four cores. At rest they drop back down to 70C.
[/QUOTE]

That is definitely bad and probably going to lower the life of your CPUs. You can also try downloading [URL="http://www.techpowerup.com/realtemp/"]Real Temp[/URL] which measures a little differently than Core Temp, a good way to compare and make sure the readings are at least similar. Real Temp usually measure a little cooler but should be close.

PS: I hope you get over your death cold soon.

philmoore 2009-02-23 17:30

Good news - I double-checked 21 of Ben's results from February 9th and 10th when he reported throttling due to overheating, and all 21 of my residues agree with his.

paleseptember 2009-03-04 00:57

Somewhere during the 3.26M file we've hit the transition from FFT length 320K to 384K. I've taken a hit from 0.007s to 0.009s per iteration. Ouch.

Ah well, onwards we march :)

paleseptember 2009-03-04 09:38

Go engracio go! \o\ \o| |o| |o/ /o/

(I know full well that this will be deleted within a day or so, but every bit of encouragement helps, right?)

engracio 2009-03-04 14:32

[quote=paleseptember;164558]Go engracio go! \o\ \o| |o| |o/ /o/

(I know full well that this will be deleted within a day or so, but every bit of encouragement helps, right?)[/quote]


Thanks Ben:smile:

Can't wait to be doing this again:groupwave::bow wave::bounce wave:

philmoore 2009-03-04 17:45

Ben, you probably took a 20% hit increase, but rounding makes it look a little worse (0.007 to 0.009). Engracio's last reservation takes us into the million-digit range, and we are close to completing up to 900,000 digits! I'm hoping we can find another probable prime soon and speed up the progress. I just uploaded more work files.

philmoore 2009-04-28 16:42

Ouch, it looks like FFT size has increased again, from 384K to 448K. I am guessing that it may have happened somewhere in the middle of Engracio's current range, does anyone else have any data on that? On the other hand, my old Athlon XP system at home is still using 384K for the exponents in the 3.93-3.94M range, so I may shift a few exponents over to that, but it is slow, around 40 hours per test.

Jeff Gilchrist 2009-04-28 17:31

[QUOTE=philmoore;171344]Ouch, it looks like FFT size has increased again, from 384K to 448K. I am guessing that it may have happened somewhere in the middle of Engracio's current range, does anyone else have any data on that? On the other hand, my old Athlon XP system at home is still using 384K for the exponents in the 3.93-3.94M range, so I may shift a few exponents over to that, but it is slow, around 40 hours per test.[/QUOTE]

I have a 2^3911320+40291 and 2^3921064+40291 that are using [B]448K[/B] FFTs and 2^3925684+2131 and 2^3916024^2131 using [B]384K[/B] still.

The 448K FFTs are taking 0.008 sec per iteration while the 384K ones are taking 0.006/0.007 secs.

Jeff.

engracio 2009-04-28 19:44

Yea Phil, I've just glanced on the wu's and they are still in the [B]384K range at 3.83m.
[/B]

philmoore 2009-04-29 22:14

I see now that the +2131 numbers are using the 384K all-complex FFTs on the Pentium D, but the Athlon is using the 384K size for all three sequences. Looks like it would make sense to do as many +40291 and +41693 numbers as possible on the Athlon and do all the +2131 numbers on the Pentium.

2131 has always had higher crossover sizes for FFT lengths.


All times are UTC. The time now is 04:06.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.