[QUOTE=LaurV;514867][URL="https://www.rieselprime.de/ziki/BrentSuyama_extension"]Here[/URL] (most probably you found it long time ago, but I didn't see this thread till petrw1 woke it up by posting)[/QUOTE]
Thanks for that! It almost makes sense, lol. :smile: 
June 5, 2019 Update ...100!!!
6 more ranges cleared: 33.2, 35.0, 38.3, 38.4, 45.2, 46.6
100 total ranges cleared or 20.12% (Plus 4 bonus ranges in the 6xM) 4 Ranges with less than 20 to go. 444 more factored....25% total factored. Personally, I found my 900th factor in this subproject. Thanks again for everyone contributing. More help is always gratefully appreciated. 
July 31, 2019 Update
7 more ranges cleared: 3.0, 31.0, 32.0, 32.6, 48.2, 49.3, 49.5
107 total ranges cleared or 21.53% 9 Ranges with less than 20 to go. 755 more factored....26.35% total factored. Personally, I found my 1,000th factor in this subproject a couple weeks ago. There has been extra help recently. Wonderful, wonderful!!! Thanks again for everyone contributing. 
That was me, I put another 2 cards into it (for a total of 4) for a while, but they only work 14 or 16 hours per day (off overnight). When full power, it totals an about 10THzD/D (you'll see the effect in few days).
Edit: or not? it seems I work a bit off your ranges :shock: (at least, what Chris is serving me). And hopefully you mean 30M not 3M. 
[QUOTE=LaurV;522811]That was me, I put another 2 cards into it (for a total of 4) for a while, but they only work 14 or 16 hours per day (off overnight). When full power, it totals an about 10THzD/D (you'll see the effect in few days).[/QUOTE]
Please trust us: we are well aware of your contributions. And further please trust: they are being targeted... :smile: 
[QUOTE=LaurV;522811]That was me, I put another 2 cards into it (for a total of 4) for a while, but they only work 14 or 16 hours per day (off overnight). When full power, it totals an about 10THzD/D (you'll see the effect in few days).
Edit: or not? it seems I work a bit off your ranges :shock: (at least, what Chris is serving me). And hopefully you mean 30M not 3M.[/QUOTE] Yes I noticed and I appreciate it immensely. 3M was cleared independently by others doing ECM. You should move to Canada for the winter. No more overheating. :missingteeth: 
90M is under 200,000 unfactored.

20190922 Update
7 more ranges cleared: 34.1, 35.4, 36.7, 36.9, 39.5, 40.4, 47.5
107 total ranges cleared or 21.53% 5 Ranges with less than 20 to go. 587 more factored....27.42% total factored. There has been extra help recently. Wonderful, wonderful!!! Thanks again for everyone contributing. 
Have you determined the number of factors you need to find to complete your initial (<60M) subproject? That might make for an interesting countdown.

[QUOTE=masser;526369]Have you determined the number of factors you need to find to complete your initial (<60M) subproject? That might make for an interesting countdown.[/QUOTE]
I took my first snapshot 20170724 (A little more than 2 years ago). However I only started working on it in October of 2017 … 2 years ago, Factors required: 20170724: 55,228 20190922: 40,087 = 27.42% complete. I have NOT found all 15,000 … only 10% of them. Some of the rest were found by other intentional helpers But most were found by standard PimeNet low level ECM and others just working on whatever strikes their fancy possibly aware of this project but in most cases likely not … that will continue. We'll get about half of the remaining factors from P1; and ECM. For these work types the work required actually diminishes as the exponents get smaller. As for the factors we will need to find via TF I understand that with each successive bit level the work required doubles ....and further that smaller exponents take longer to TF at the same bit level. That said I am putting a little faith in hardware getting faster over time. As well, I've had a lot of help from others (whom I will not single out; but, THANKS!) As well, there are some ranges between 6xM and 8xM that are not complete; I've completed a few. Based on TF levels for higher ranges I expect them to complete without any additional effort on my part. So when will it actually finish; or will it finish at all????? I hope so; I have no plans to stop. 
20191120 Update
7 more ranges cleared: 2.4, 33.5, 33.7, 35.7, 36.4, 39.7, 42.9
And a bonus range (I dabble a bit in the 60M ranges too): 64.3 121 total ranges cleared or 24.35% 20 Ranges with less than 20 to go. 2,669 more factored (17,810 total)....32.25% total factored. Got a HUGE!!!! boost in the last couple months from a contributor whom shall remain anonymous. Thanks again for everyone contributing. Personally I have completed just over 75,000 assignments. 1,252 factors (470 TF, 753 P1, 29 ECM) and just over 2 Million GhzDays to this project. 
Want to participate?
I won't go into a lot of detail because most of you understand this at least as well as I do.
And I am well aware that this effort will NOT in any way contribute to finding primes. It is nothing more than a subproject that interests me: My Iron; My Choice. And somewhat surprisingly and flattering it has peaked the interest of several others who have been helping over much of the last 2 years. Thank you; thank you. First and foremost no toestepping. Don't grab already assigned exponents. However, since some of us are working N/A (Not Assigned) we need to let each other know where we are working as such. A few recommendations: 1. What you are working on can be noted here with a post 2. There is another thread specifically for P1 coordination: [url]https://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?p=530775[/url] 3. For TF between 30M and 69M Chalsall is reserving and coordinating assignments here: [url]https://www.gpu72.com/reports/available/[/url] If you are getting work from [url]www.gpu72.com[/url] (ie. via MisFit) you need to specify a work type of "Double Check Tests" optionally with "What makes sense" or "Let GPU72 decide". Briefly I am looking at 0.1Million ranges under 60Million; attempting to get each range to under 2,000 unfactored. Look here at the 0.1M zoom level where the unfactored column is above 1999: [url]https://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/0/4/2000[/url] At the low end 2.6M to about 19.9M your best bet is lots of ECM OR LARGE P1. MUCH larger than the default. There is some discussion at the thread above re P1 coordination. At the highest end 50M+ I suggest I've done at much P1 as is needed. We are left with TF above 74 bits. The remaining ranges (20.0M  49.9M) will need a wise combination of somewhat aggressive P1 and TF. At the present time the bulk of the effort is in the 30M and 40M ranges with lots of P1 and TF. Since anyone is welcome to help out anywhere definite coordination is required here. Thanks and enjoy. 
[QUOTE=lycorn;495476]Looking at it from a slightly different point of vue:
157 [B]0.1M[/B] ranges cleared, out of 600 ([B]26.17%)[/B] 13 [B]1M[/B] ranges cleared, out of 60 ([B]21.67%)[/B] 1 [B]10M[/B] range cleared, out of 6 ([B]16.67%)[/B][/QUOTE] I like lycorn's metrics: 224 100K ranges cleared, out of 600: 37.33% 17 1M ranges cleared, out of 60: 28.33% 1 10M range cleared, out of 6: 16.67% 
[QUOTE=masser;531124]I like lycorn's metrics:
224 100K ranges cleared, out of 600: 37.33% 17 1M ranges cleared, out of 60: 28.33% 1 10M range cleared, out of 5: 16.67%[/QUOTE] Agreed....I watch at every level all the way to 999M. I just focus my efforts below 59.9M. I am sure that 90M+ will take care of itself with the standard work. Between 59.9M and 89.9M there are only 16 ranges; some of which are being worked on. As well I know there are some 0.1M ranges that I will NOT complete because they would require excessive effort. However, I do intend to clear every 1M range … if I live that long :P 
Less than 2 million unfactored in the 2 < p < 10^8 range!
See: [URL="https://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/0/2/0"]https://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/0/2/0[/URL] 
YAY!!!!
[QUOTE=masser;531835]Less than 2 million unfactored in the 2 < p < 10^8 range!
See: [URL="https://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/0/2/0"]https://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/0/2/0[/URL][/QUOTE] Our first 100M Range cleared. And these 10M ranges: 50M, 60M, 70M, 80M and 90M These 1M ranges: 0M, 1M, 2M, 44M, 46M, 47M, 49M, 50M to 98M, 332M, 875M, 977M. The 0.1M ranges (my ultimate goal) are too numerous to list here. 
[QUOTE=petrw1;531123]
First and foremost no toestepping. Don't grab already assigned exponents. However, since some of us are working N/A (Not Assigned) we need to let each other know where we are working as such. Since anyone is welcome to help out anywhere definite coordination is required here. [/QUOTE] I am currently TFing the 19M range from 69 to 70 bits. Progressing from "top to bottom", the sub ranges 19.9 to 19.6 are already at 70. I´ve found 76 factors so far. No immediate plans to stop, I´ll let you know from time to time where I´m standing. This contributes to petrw1´s subproject and is also part of something I´ve been monitoring over the last couple of months or so: the elimination of all exponents < 1G TFed to less than 70 (either by finding a factor or by just upping the TF level to >= 70 bits). There are people working actively in the 68 bit level, as well as some work on 64>65 and 65>66. SInce the 24th of September, 7991 were "eliminated", there are currently 384843 to go. The average bit level for those exponents is currently 68.4944 bits. 
[QUOTE=lycorn;531898]I am currently TFing the 19M range from 69 to 70 bits. Progressing from "top to bottom", the sub ranges 19.9 to 19.6 are already at 70. I´ve found 76 factors so far. No immediate plans to stop, I´ll let you know from time to time where I´m standing.
This contributes to petrw1´s subproject and is also part of something I´ve been monitoring over the last couple of months or so: the elimination of all exponents < 1G TFed to less than 70 (either by finding a factor or by just upping the TF level to >= 70 bits). There are people working actively in the 68 bit level, as well as some work on 64>65 and 65>66. SInce the 24th of September, 7991 were "eliminated", there are currently 384843 to go. The average bit level for those exponents is currently 68.4944 bits.[/QUOTE] Come down to the sub 1M playing field :) 
[QUOTE=Gordon;531961]Come down to the sub 1M playing field :)[/QUOTE]
I am playing there already... Found 68 new ECM factors since last March. Nothing to write home about, but... 
[QUOTE=petrw1;531123]
First and foremost no toestepping. Don't grab already assigned exponents. However, since some of us are working N/A (Not Assigned) we need to let each other know where we are working as such. A few recommendations: 1. What you are working on can be noted here with a post 2. There is another thread specifically for P1 coordination: [url]https://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?p=530775[/url] [/QUOTE] I am using my two slow GPUs to TF the "tentpoles" of this project, the 100K ranges that have over 2200 unfactored exponents remaining. Currently, they are working the 17.0M range. Once that range is under 2200 unfactored, I'll move the GPUs to 15.5, 10.7 and/or 14.0. I'm still using my i5 cpu to P1/ECM the 2.6M and 2.8M ranges, as noted in the redoing P1 thread. 
Yesterday I finished the 19M range (69 > 70 bits). 218 factors found.
On to 18M. 18.9 already under way. 
[QUOTE=lycorn;534973]Yesterday I finished the 19M range (69 > 70 bits). 218 factors found.
On to 18M. 18.9 already under way.[/QUOTE] :YAY: 
20200120 Update...a big month
19 more ranges cleared: 2.6, 2.7, 5.3, 30.7, 31.7, 34.0, 36.0, 36.3, 36.6, 37.8, 39.0, 40.7, 41.5, 42.3, 43.1, 43.2, 447, 46.5, 49.8
And 2 bonus ranges (I dabble a bit in the 60M ranges too): 63.1, 63.7 140 total ranges cleared or 28.17% 22 Ranges with less than 20 to go. 2,520 more factored (20,330 total)....36.81% total factored. Continuing to get lots of great help. THANKS Thanks again for everyone contributing. 
[QUOTE=masser;532286]I am using my two slow GPUs to TF the "tentpoles" of this project, the 100K ranges that have over 2200 unfactored exponents remaining. [/QUOTE]
Change of plans. I will finish the 17.0 M range, but then move on to LLTF due to the great demand for that work currently. My GPUs will move back to the "under 20M unfactored" project once the LLTF effort is more comfortably ahead of the first time LL/PRP wavefront. 
Less than 200,000 unfactored below .....
10M.
I know it's a duplicate with New Milestone but I think it belongs in both 
[QUOTE=petrw1;537134]10M.
I know it's a duplicate with New Milestone but I think it belongs in both[/QUOTE] Nice! 
I made this overview of the number of unfactored exponents in each range:
[URL="http://hoegge.dk/mersenne/unfactored.html"]unfactored.html[/URL] based on the hourly primenet stats: [url]https://mersenne.org/primenet[/url] 
[QUOTE=ATH;537262]I made this overview of the number of unfactored exponents in each range:
[URL="http://hoegge.dk/mersenne/unfactored.html"]unfactored.html[/URL] based on the hourly primenet stats: [url]https://mersenne.org/primenet[/url][/QUOTE] Nice 
[QUOTE=ATH;537262]I made this overview of the number of unfactored exponents in each range:
[URL="http://hoegge.dk/mersenne/unfactored.html"]unfactored.html[/URL] based on the hourly primenet stats: [url]https://mersenne.org/primenet[/url][/QUOTE] That's nice. Thank you for sharing the report! I would just suggest that the already known primes be removed from the "unfactored" count, so it will reflect more accurately the number of remaining exponents to factor. 
[QUOTE=lycorn;537378]That's nice. Thank you for sharing the report!
I would just suggest that the already known primes be removed from the "unfactored" count, so it will reflect more accurately the number of remaining exponents to factor.[/QUOTE] Thanks, good point, I forgot to remove the primes. Done now. The report updates 20min past the hour. 
That's lovely, thx!

It looks cute and we like the colors, but isn't that a duplication of the (more functional) [URL="https://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/0/1/0"]visualization tool[/URL] from Chris/James?

Mine is based on GIMPS data from mersenne.org and the other one is based on mersenne.ca data. Looks like there is not 100% agreement on the numbers.
Edit: I just noticed the mersenne.ca is from 20200212T23:59:00. Comparing to the report from mersenne.org on 20200213 00:00 UTC, they are almost in 100% agreement, just 4 exponents off: [CODE] mersenne.org mersenne.ca 0M100M [I][B]1995436 1995437[/B][/I] 100M200M 2070999 2070999 200M300M [I][B]2146896 2146899[/B][/I] 300M400M 2128386 2128386 400M500M 2152672 2152672 500M600M 2130295 2130295 600M700M 2137174 2137174 700M800M 2150205 2150205 800M900M 2117670 2117670 900M1000M 2117112 2117112 0M1000M [I][B]21146845 21146849[/B][/I][/CODE] 
20200301 Update
14 more ranges cleared: 32.3, 33.1, 33.8, 34.2, 34.3, 34.5, 35.2, 39.8, 39.9, 40.2, 41.3, 41.6, 41.8, 41.9,
And 2 bonus ranges (I dabble a bit in the 60M ranges too): 66.3, 66.5 154 total ranges cleared or 30.99% 15 Ranges with less than 20 to go. 1,146 more factored (21,475 total)....38.88% total factored. Continuing to get lots of great help. THANKS Thanks again for everyone contributing. 
[QUOTE=ATH;537491]Mine is based on GIMPS data from mersenne.org and the other one is based on mersenne.ca data. Looks like there is not 100% agreement on the numbers.
[/QUOTE] There are in fact some temporary discrepancies on the numbers. For example, if you check now the mersenne.ca report it will tell you that 38 numbers were factored during the 24 hours of the 3rd of March. The Primenet page will display 337. This type of discrepancy is rather common; the mersenne.ca count of exponents factored in the last 24 hours (better said, the day before) is sometimes lower, sometimes higher than Primenet´s. 
Just finished the 18M range to 70 bits.
248 factors found. Starting 17M. 
[QUOTE=lycorn;539674]Just finished the 18M range to 70 bits.
248 factors found. Starting 17M.[/QUOTE] :chris2be8: 
17M finished to 70 bits.
183 factors found. 16M to start in a few days. 
May 12 Update
12 more ranges cleared: 2.8, 2.9, 30.0, 30.9, 31.3, 31.4, 31.8, 32.2, 33.4, 35.9, 37.4, 39.4
166 total ranges cleared or 33.40% 14 Ranges with less than 20 to go. 1,608 more factored (23,083 total)....41.80% total factored. Continuing to get lots of great help. THANKS Thanks again for everyone contributing. 
Curious how you can contribute?
Briefly I am working on getting ALL "100K ranges" to under 2,000 unfactored exponents.
[B]So, to be clear, I am finding factors; I am NOT looking for primes.[/B] "100K ranges": Exponents from 3.0Million to 3.1M; 56.6M to 56.7M; 993.4M to 993.5M. To date all ranges under 3.1M are "cleared" (under 2,000 unfactored). Effort will NOT be required over 86.4M; these ranges will ultimately clear via the current prescribed TF levels and P1. I started this personal subproject July of 2017 (almost 3 years ago). I have been primarily focused on ranges up to 60M. As of the start date there were 498 ranges to go (out of a possible 600). As of today that count is at 332. Finally, there are 11 ranges in my sideview mirror between 60.0M and 86.3M. The required factors can be found via 1 of 3 methods: 1. Trial Factoring (TF): Can be used on any exponent but are most efficient on higher Exponents and at lower Bit Levels. 2. P1: Can be used on any exponents but are most efficient on lower Exponents. 3. ECM: Best suited for the LOW Exponents (under about 10M). ========== HOW CAN YOU HELP? ======= First, keep in mind that most exponents in the ranges of interest have already had TF and P1 to the prescribed levels required before PrimeNet will assign LL/DC/PRP tests. In order to find the required factors more aggressive effort is required. Most importantly, if the work to be done is NOT assigned with PrimeNet please let others know here where you plan to work. 1. Look here for ranges with more than 1999 unfactored: [url]https://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/0/4/2000[/url] Use a Zoom Level of 0.1M. 2. Determine which range you want to work on and make note of:  How many factors are required  The current TF bit level  How well P1 has been done using: (Sort the results by lowest B2 and B1) [url]https://www.mersenne.org/report_factoring_effort/?exp_lo=20000000&exp_hi=20099999[/url] 3. Determine the best factoring method for the range chosen. Consider:  For TF: GPUs are best for TF. A bit level of TF will find about 20  25 factors; but each successive bit level takes twice as long as the previous bit level.  For P1: P1 requires LOT of RAM. The success rate is based on the difference between the P1 already done and the P1 you could do with higher B1/B2 values: This tool helps calculate the expected probabilities and effort required: [url]https://www.mersenne.ca/prob.php[/url]  For ECM: Again only for lower exponents. 4. Advertise here and then get/make the required assignments.  The effort required for your chosen work can be determined here: [url]https://www.mersenne.ca/credit.php[/url] 5. Have fun; good luck and Thank You. ========== The sample link provided tells me ============ The link I provided above for 20.0M to 20.9M shows that for 20.4M  2,048 are unfactored; 49 factors are required to get this count UNDER 2000.  It is currently factored to 70 bits.  These exponents are probably too high for ECM.  If I choose TF to 71 I can expect to find about 20 more factors with an effort of about 23,900 GhzDays using the above tools. If your GPU does 1,000 per day that is 24 days of work.  If I choose to then TF to 72 it will find about 20 more but this time taking 48 more days.  I could consider some aggressive P1. I can see that there are several hundred exponents that based on current B1/B2 had a 3% or less odds of finding a factor. If I use larger B1/B2 that give more an extra 2% or better chance of finding a factor (statistically: 1 in 50) for an effort of about 2.5 GhzDays each P1. 125 GhzDays per factor on average. This is probably about a week per factor on a decent current PC. What might I do/recommend.  At least 1 more bit level of TF; 2 if you have an upper end GPU.  Then some aggressive P1 with my CPU. P.S. My current focus is the remaining 21 ranges between 40.0 and 49.9M. I am doing aggressive TF and P1. =========== THANKS FOR YOUR TIME ========= 
If I were to dabble with ECM in the 4.0M block, should I test the numbers that have been advanced to 70 bits with the idea that TF has given up, or should I test the ones still at 69 with the idea that there are more small factors to be found?
I won't be doing very much work, just a core or 4 until I get bored of not finding factors. 
[QUOTE=VBCurtis;545291]If I were to dabble with ECM in the 4.0M block, should I test the numbers that have been advanced to 70 bits with the idea that TF has given up, or should I test the ones still at 69 with the idea that there are more small factors to be found?
I won't be doing very much work, just a core or 4 until I get bored of not finding factors.[/QUOTE] Could you run P1 on that range instead? There are many candidates with B1 < 200,000 and B2 < 4M. If you are set on running ECM, I would say focus on the candidates at the 68 bit TF level. That range is close enough to 1999 unfactored, that you might be able to reach the target with either factoring method. 
[QUOTE=masser;545329]Could you run P1 on that range instead? There are many candidates with B1 < 200,000 and B2 < 4M.
If you are set on running ECM, I would say focus on the candidates at the 68 bit TF level. That range is close enough to 1999 unfactored, that you might be able to reach the target with either factoring method.[/QUOTE] I tend to agree. I hope I am not speaking out of turn but I seem to recall a post or two from Bob Silverman … who knows WAYYYYYY more about any of this than I do … that even for these small exponents P1 is more efficient that ECM. As well in these low ranges you do NOT need a lot of RAM to run decent P1. For example: [url]https://www.mersenne.ca/prob.php?exponent=4000001&b1=1500000&b2=35000000&guess_saved_tests=2&factorbits=68&K=1&C=1[/url] 6% chance of finding a factor for only 0.6 GhzDays and with only a few hundred Meg of RAM. Thanks; welcome and good luck. 
And for those looking for a challenge.
There are a couple dozen ranges, most that have had aggressive P1 done on the bulk of the assignments in the range as well as deep TF....
And still they stubbornly refuse to give up easily. These ranges will need either or both of: 1. Even more aggressive P1 on those exponents will current mediocre P1. For this you will want a (or many) powerful CPU with lots of RAM 2. Deeper TF; where each TF assignment will take 100 or more GhzDays. For this you will want a (or many) powerful GPU.  And you'll need some patience. I'll give some examples; I'll give range; current TF level; remaining Factors required: These 3 ranges could benefit from extra P1 on small subset of the exponents. 34.4; 74 bits TF; 60 Factors 35.1; 74; 77 35.3; 74; 64 These 4 ranges are NOT yet aggressively P1'd. 42.6; 74; 88 43.0; 74; 84 48.4; 74; 83 49.6; 74; 81 These ranges have had aggressive P1. 56.8; 74; 39 58.7; 74; 37 59.4; 74; 46 68.4; 75; 30 73.1; 75; 36 73.5; 75; 43 Thanks and good luck. 
I'm fairly certain RDS pointed out the futility of running P1 on numbers that had already been P1'ed; recommending ECM instead. I went looking for his posts, but didn't find anything.
I don't have a GPU setup, and with P1 now on GPU it feels like the best use of this old laptop (Broadwell ultrabook, 2core) is to dabble in P95ECM. I'll run curves for a week or so, perhaps until a factor turns up, and then I'll do the same with P1. Does that 6% chance of factor take into account the previous P1 run that was done? The site doesn't appear to indicate it does, in which case it's a pretty big exaggeration of the actual chance of factor. Meanwhile, ECM doesn't care what prior P1 has been done. I'll gather some data and see if there's a clear winner if there isn't, I'll do ECM just for something different. 
[QUOTE=VBCurtis;545345]I'm fairly certain RDS pointed out the futility of running P1 on numbers that had already been P1'ed; recommending ECM instead. I went looking for his posts, but didn't find anything.[/QUOTE]
You could very well be correct. I think what I was recalling is that when neither has already been done then P1 is more effective than ECM....though I'm not sure at what low levels of P1 that MORE higher P1 is better than ECM. [QUOTE] Does that 6% chance of factor take into account the previous P1 run that was done? The site doesn't appear to indicate it does, in which case it's a pretty big exaggeration of the actual chance of factor. Meanwhile, ECM doesn't care what prior P1 has been done. [/QUOTE] No, sorry it does not. I mean to then forgot. The current P1 ranges from about 2.4% to 8.2% (yes, someone went real hard on some … also factored them to 70 bits). But about 40% of the exponents are under 3.42%. So, yet for these the net difference (vs 6%) would be about 2.5  3.5%. And 8.15% is only 2 GhzDays 
Excellent, thank you for confirming my estimates about P1 with some prior P1 done.
ECM does seem a less efficient method than redoing P1 for candidates with prior B1 of 120k150k. I'll run ECM anyway for a while and see if my estimates about factor frequency are reasonable; I imagine I'll end up P1'ing the ones that stand to benefit most after I play with ECM. 
I´m back at work in low ranges.
Just started 16M, 69>70. 16.9 is currently underway. On another note, the overall < 20M subproject is now getting a huge push from the folks at SRBase / BOINC. They are sweeping through high ranges at an amazing rate, finding an impressive number of new factors. Let´s see how long this will last. 
In the 4.0M range I've chosen to work in, P1 seems about twice as fast per expected factor as ECM. I have ECM running on an old laptop anyway, with P1 on a newer machine.
I found my first two factors with P1 for this effort, 76 and 81 bits. Rather satisfying! For the sake of this effort, too bad they were factors for the same exponent... When I saw a 48digit factor in the results file, I was like "awww, yea! I bet that's a record!" (for this size) Alas, just a pair of normalsized factors. Exponent is 4067587. 
1,000 Days
A thousand days have passed since my first assignment in this subproject.
In those thousand days I:  Found 1,569 factors  Completed over 3,000,000 GhzDays of work (mostly thanks to my 2080Ti)  Got 50M range to less than 10 ranges with over 1,999 factors remaining  Got 40M to under 200,000 factors remaining But this is a mere fraction of the total factors found and ranges cleared by the collective. Wouldn't it be cool if when I get to 1,999 days I can declare that the under2,000 project is complete! Thanks to all. 
[QUOTE=petrw1;547078]
 Got 40M to under 200,000 factors remaining [/QUOTE] :banana: 
Also, taking the figures in [URL="https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=481690&postcount=36"]This post[/URL] as a reference, and noting that at the time of typing my current post the number of unfactored exponents below 1G is 21 029 537, we see that in a bit more than 2 years we cleared just over 500,000 of them. Not bad, maybe another 5 years to achieve the goal that makes the subject of this thread.

Today we fell below 21M unfactored exponents: 20,999,392 as of 22:00 UTC (6 pm EDT).
Edit: It happened at 19:00 UTC: 18:00 UTC (2 pm EDT): 21,000,058 19:00 UTC (3 pm EDT): 20,999,407 
[QUOTE=ATH;547751]Today we fell below 21M unfactored exponents: 20,999,392 as of 22:00 UTC (6 pm EDT).
Edit: It happened at 19:00 UTC: 18:00 UTC (2 pm EDT): 21,000,058 19:00 UTC (3 pm EDT): 20,999,407[/QUOTE] Yes, SRBase is knocking off the factors like a madman...he swept through all the remaining 8 million or so 7071 bit assignments in a matter of a couple months 
[QUOTE=ATH;547751]18:00 UTC (2 pm EDT): 21,000,058
19:00 UTC (3 pm EDT): 20,999,407[/QUOTE] By the way where do you see this? 
My script that generates this page: [URL="http://hoegge.dk/mersenne/unfactored.html"]unfactored.html[/URL]
I ran it on the hourly backups I have of [url]https://www.mersenne.org/primenet[/url] 
I've completed 100,000 assignments for this project
In just under 3 years.
65,710 TF for 642 Factors with a 0.98% success rate 31,195 P1 for 972 Factors with a 3.12% success rate 3,095 ECM for 29 Factors with a 0.94% success rate 
After running my Nvidia GTX 950 for 30 days, I was able to find more than 60 factors in the ranges 71>72 bits, 72>73 bits and partially in 73>74 bits, reducing the number of unfactored Mersenne numbers in the range [b]987.9M[/b] to 1999.
According to [url]https://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/0/4/98700[/url], the number is 2001, but this includes the factored numbers M987977819 and M987976229 that were found after 00:00 GMT today, so the current number is 1999. 
Great...that's 1 less remaining.
[QUOTE=alpertron;550295]After running my Nvidia GTX 950 for 30 days, I was able to find more than 60 factors in the ranges 71>72 bits, 72>73 bits and partially in 73>74 bits, reducing the number of unfactored Mersenne numbers in the range [b]987.9M[/b] to 1999. According to [url]https://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/0/4/98700[/url], the number is 2001, but this includes the factored numbers M987977819 and M987976229 that were found after 00:00 GMT today, so the current number is 1999.[/QUOTE] 
3 Year Project Update
It is 3 years since I took my first set of stat for this subproject.
I didn't personally start working on it until 3 months later but others are always making progress. Since last update (May 12) 11 more ranges cleared: 3.3, 30.6, 40.0, 45.3, 45.8, 50.2, 52.3, 52.9, 53.2, 53.9, 56.6 And 8 bonus ranges: 61.6, 65.4, 69.8, 71.8, 75.2, 78.2, 81.4, 86.3. The 6 cleared in the 5x.xM and all the bonus ranges are a HUGE thanks to someone (who prefers to remain anonymous) who took up my challenge and cleared most of the STUBBORN ranges I mentioned a few posts above. In the last 3 years: 177 total ranges cleared or 35.61% 14 Ranges with less than 20 to go. 945 more factored (24,026 total)....43.50% total factored. Continuing to get lots of great help. THANKS Thanks again for everyone contributing. 
43 down, 200 to go
I've worked on the [URL="https://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/0/5/1400"]14.0M range[/URL] for the last 4 months: 43 factors found, with a mix of TF, P1, and a little bit of ECM. We now have 200 to go for the under 2000 goal. If everything goes according to plan, I should complete this range in about 2 years.

[QUOTE=masser;551969]I've worked on the [URL="https://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/0/5/1400"]14.0M range[/URL] for the last 4 months: 43 factors found, with a mix of TF, P1, and a little bit of ECM. We now have 200 to go for the under 2000 goal. If everything goes according to plan, I should complete this range in about 2 years.[/QUOTE]
:wraithx: Yay 
Low bit level assignments now available.
29,xxx,xxx from 7072 bits. (Only 8 and 16 GhzDays per)
Yee Haw. 
10M to 11M range
I have moved the entire range to 70bits and found about 300 factors with mostly TF (about 250) and P1 (about 50). It took me about a half year.
1028 factors left to find. 
[QUOTE=Viliam Furik;557762]I have moved the entire range to 70bits and found about 300 factors with mostly TF (about 250) and P1 (about 50). It took me about a half year.
1028 factors left to find.[/QUOTE] Nice job! What's next for you? 
[QUOTE=masser;557767]Nice job! What's next for you?[/QUOTE]
After I finishoff this range, I want to do the stubborn 42.6M range. I was also thinking if it wouldn't be easier if instead of less than 2000 unfactored exponents we aimed for something like 40% unfactored. Well, it would certainly be easier, but the real question is whether it would be good enough... 
[QUOTE=Viliam Furik;557772]After I finishoff this range, I want to do the stubborn 42.6M range.
I was also thinking if it wouldn't be easier if instead of less than 2000 unfactored exponents we aimed for something like 40% unfactored. Well, it would certainly be easier, but the real question is whether it would be good enough...[/QUOTE] I absolutely appreciate any and all help I get. I will suggest where I could use help but i'll never dictate what anyone works on. 40% is a round number and if you choose to stop there I won't complain but I'm still hooked on under 2000. PS if you check for recent factors found under 80M you'll notice someone putting a lot of GPU power to the stubborn ranges. How long they stick around and whether 42.6 is in their sights remains to be seen. Thanks again. 
Also watch for where TJAOI is turning in factors. I think most recently it is in the 67 bit range. I saw some recently, I don't remember what exponent level.

Thanks to a whole bunch of P1 factors, 4.0M is now complete (1998 remaining).
Might masser like some P1 or ECM assistance at 14.0M? I have a 4GBram laptop I'm using for this effort, so it won't be much assistance... 
I can help, 4 cores 16GB, how do I setup Prime95?
Edit: I don't care about the credits. Someone just send me a worktodo file with ECM or P1 to be run on one worker 4 threads. 
[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;560078]I can help, 4 cores 16GB, how do I setup Prime95?
Edit: I don't care about the credits. Someone just send me a worktodo file with ECM or P1 to be run on one worker 4 threads.[/QUOTE] Thanks a lot!!!! How much setup help do you need? With 16GB or RAM I expect you'd get the best throughput with 4Workers/1Threads or possibly 2W/2T. How much work are you interested in? Here are P1 100 assignments; 3.88GhzDays each; expected success rate close to 3% Divide among workers as you see fit...or use this tool to divide them for you: [url]https://www.mersenne.ca/balance.php[/url] [CODE]PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39300199,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39300439,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39300553,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39300907,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39300971,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39303083,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39304439,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39304519,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39306121,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39307679,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39310961,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39310967,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39313913,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39314131,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39314839,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39315379,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39316523,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39317231,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39317809,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39319363,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39321619,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39323149,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39323857,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39323981,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39324079,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39326041,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39327403,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39327469,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39328207,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39334051,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39336569,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39336607,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39336919,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39337537,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39343327,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39344083,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39344693,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39353863,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39355471,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39357511,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39358283,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39360413,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39362689,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39363659,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39366583,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39366953,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39367397,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39367589,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39367897,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39368783,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39371351,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39373157,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39373349,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39374017,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39374879,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39375857,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39377353,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39378373,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39379783,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39380603,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39380941,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39385121,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39386257,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39387197,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39387709,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39388483,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39389057,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39390293,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39391039,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39391229,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39391589,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39392011,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39394067,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39395347,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39395437,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39398987,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39399743,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39399781,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39300473,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39302359,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39302651,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39303611,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39304607,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39305249,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39305821,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39306089,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39306779,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39310147,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39310367,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39311099,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39311663,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39311911,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39312283,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39313427,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39313471,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39314893,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39315557,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39316349,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39316441,1,1000000,20000000,74 PMINUS1=N/A,1,2,39317723,1,1000000,20000000,74[/CODE] 
This is enough for now, added to client, thank you.
Edit: ETA 20 days. 
[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;560087]This is enough for now, added to client, thank you.
Edit: ETA 20 days.[/QUOTE] Your first result came in with B1 only: Is it possible you forgot to allocate RAM in the Prime95 client? In Windows its under: Options / CPU.... [CODE] Carlos Pinho HomeComputer 39300199 NFPM1 20201016 23:30 0.0 1.9092 B1=1000000[/CODE] 
Under local.txt I had:
Memory=0 during 7:3023:30 else 0 so I changed now to Memory=14000 during 7:3023:30 else 14000 
[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;560108]Under local.txt I had:
Memory=0 during 7:3023:30 else 0 so I changed now to Memory=14000 during 7:3023:30 else 14000[/QUOTE] Perfect If you choose to readd the few assignments already done with the old setting; as long you did not delete the workfiles it will only run Stage 2 with the B2 
[QUOTE=petrw1;560110]Perfect
If you choose to readd the few assignments already done with the old setting; as long you did not delete the workfiles it will only run Stage 2 with the B2[/QUOTE] Of course..thank you. 
Funny though but I think I’m credited twice per one run on B1 with the memory mistake, is this correct?
First run B1 only: 1.90GHz/day Second run B2 only: 3.8855 GHz/day 
[QUOTE=VBCurtis;560076]Thanks to a whole bunch of P1 factors, 4.0M is now complete (1998 remaining).
Might masser like some P1 or ECM assistance at 14.0M? I have a 4GBram laptop I'm using for this effort, so it won't be much assistance...[/QUOTE] Awesome job on 4.0M! I have "finished" the 14.00M to 14.01M range. If you were willing to run 3 ECM curves at the B1=50K level on each of the 200 remaining candidates in that range, that would be helpful. If that's too boring, we could think of something else. 
[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;560133]Funny though but I think I’m credited twice per one run on B1 with the memory mistake, is this correct?
First run B1 only: 1.90GHz/day Second run B2 only: 3.8855 GHz/day[/QUOTE] I believe that is correct. I've seen the same before. 
All 100Million ranges under 2.1M unfactored.
[url]https://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/0/1/0[/url]

So prime95 is majority of the time only allocating 8GB for P1 Stage 2 when I've seen it using 1213GB before after I re save the local.txt memory requirements to use the 12/13GB. What am I doing wrong?

[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;560295]So prime95 is majority of the time only allocating 8GB for P1 Stage 2 when I've seen it using 1213GB before after I re save the local.txt memory requirements to use the 12/13GB. What am I doing wrong?[/QUOTE]
How many workers do you have doing P1? If it is more than one then the total allocated to all workers will not exceed about 95% of what you have specified in local.txt. 8G will still get you at least a third of the Relative Primes for one Stage 2 which will be very efficient. 
1 worker 4 threads.

[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;560345]1 worker 4 threads.[/QUOTE]
You'd probably see better thruput with 4/1 or 2/2. When it allocates 8GB does it process ALL relative primes? For example something like: [CODE][Oct 19 11:18] Available memory is 14000MB. [Oct 19 11:18] Using 8000MB of memory. Processing 480 relative primes (0 of 480 already processed). [/CODE] 
[QUOTE=petrw1;560347]You'd probably see better thruput with 4/1 or 2/2.[/QUOTE]
This is a laptop and worried about cooling, this is a better option for me. [QUOTE=petrw1;560347] When it allocates 8GB does it process ALL relative primes? For example something like: [CODE][Oct 19 11:18] Available memory is 14000MB. [Oct 19 11:18] Using 8000MB of memory. Processing 480 relative primes (0 of 480 already processed). [/CODE][/QUOTE] Yes but now looking closer I can see when it needs to process 960 relative primes it uses 12GB. We are fine anyway....it is the first time I taking more time to look at client's logs. Thank you indeed. 
[QUOTE=masser;560142]Awesome job on 4.0M!
I have "finished" the 14.00M to 14.01M range. If you were willing to run 3 ECM curves at the B1=50K level on each of the 200 remaining candidates in that range, that would be helpful. If that's too boring, we could think of something else.[/QUOTE] I've started ECM on the suggested range. My first set is 5 curves at B1=250K; I may adjust that later. A curve at this size on the Surface tablet I'm using takes about 25k seconds, so ought to progress at roughly 5 candidates per week. I'll give it a couple weeks to start. 
[QUOTE=VBCurtis;560448]I've started ECM on the suggested range. My first set is 5 curves at B1=250K; I may adjust that later. A curve at this size on the Surface tablet I'm using takes about 25k seconds, so ought to progress at roughly 5 candidates per week. I'll give it a couple weeks to start.[/QUOTE]
Thank you; that will be great. If you are interested, I could make some P1 tasks available too. 
My progress is slow: 35/100 done, two factors found.

100 down; 143 to go
[QUOTE=masser;551969]I've worked on the [URL="https://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/0/5/1400"]14.0M range[/URL] for the last 4 months: 43 factors found, with a mix of TF, P1, and a little bit of ECM. We now have 200 to go for the under 2000 goal. If everything goes according to plan, I should complete this range in about 2 years.[/QUOTE]
We've now been factoring the 14.0M range for 7 months: 100 factors have been found, with a mix of TF, P1 and a little bit of ECM. 143 factors to go for the under 2000 goal, so we are almost halfway. Some ECM highlights: [M]M14099401[/M] has a 89.780 bit factor: [url=https://www.mersenne.ca/M14099401]1063184393209412095691752279[/url] [M]M14017981[/M] has a 88.926 bit factor: [url=https://www.mersenne.ca/M14017981]588003375432513022023853873[/url] [M]M14006803[/M] has a 83.617 bit factor: [url=https://www.mersenne.ca/M14006803]14830679176132537433148793[/url] [M]M14005253[/M] has a 77.906 bit factor: [url=https://www.mersenne.ca/M14005253]283076393615085922807961[/url] Some P1 highlights: [M]M14018573[/M] has a 105.648 bit factor: [url=https://www.mersenne.ca/M14018573]63580734348894934266923905132639[/url] [M]M14057863[/M] has a 98.809 bit factor: [url=https://www.mersenne.ca/M14057863]555219273599892685265834731087[/url] [M]M14010797[/M] has a 80.792 bit factor: [url=https://www.mersenne.ca/M14010797]2093252408084980613260481[/url] One TF highlight: [M]M14079067[/M] has a 71.198 bit factor: [url=https://www.mersenne.ca/exponent/14079067]More ECM would have found this, I think[/url] It will become harder to find factors, so I'm happy to report that we have gotten some help lately from others on the forum. Many thanks! 
[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;561066]My progress is slow: 35/100 done, two factors found.[/QUOTE]
Your factor rate is good; I expect about 1 in 30 attempts. If you want to see if LapTop heat is actually impacted you could try 2 workers / 2 cores each. You'll get better thruput and maybe without extra heat. I say that because in your setup (1 worker 4 cores) all 4 cores are still working hard. Thanks for any and all contributions 
[QUOTE=petrw1;561093]Your factor rate is good; I expect about 1 in 30 attempts.
If you want to see if LapTop heat is actually impacted you could try 2 workers / 2 cores each. You'll get better thruput and maybe without extra heat. I say that because in your setup (1 worker 4 cores) all 4 cores are still working hard. Thanks for any and all contributions[/QUOTE] Ok, so that means I’ll have to reduce the memory or how to allocate only 6 GB per worker if I want to set 2 workers 2 cores?! 
[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;561199]Ok, so that means I’ll have to reduce the memory or how to allocate only 6 GB per worker if I want to set 2 workers 2 cores?![/QUOTE]
Prime95 looks after it. If only 1 worker is doing Stage 2 it gets all 12GB; if 2 workers are doing Stage 2 Prime95 will divide it though not necessarily even; it depends on where each worker is at. 
[QUOTE=petrw1;561208]Prime95 looks after it.
If only 1 worker is doing Stage 2 it gets all 12GB; if 2 workers are doing Stage 2 Prime95 will divide it though not necessarily even; it depends on where each worker is at.[/QUOTE] Updated for 2/2, will see what happens in the next days. Thank you once again. 
I would like to run TF on the range 020M from lowest bit to 6970 bits but I can’t seem to manage to download a sample file to try it. Also I have an account on GPU72 and can’t get them from them. Help please?

[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;561656]I would like to run TF on the range 020M from lowest bit to 6970 bits but I can’t seem to manage to download a sample file to try it. Also I have an account on GPU72 and can’t get them from them. Help please?[/QUOTE]Use the Factoring limits report on the site, for instance :
[url=https://www.mersenne.org/report_factoring_effort/?exp_lo=2&exp_hi=1000000&bits_lo=1&bits_hi=69&txt=1&exassigned=1&tfonly=1&worktodo=1&tftobits=70]"Factoring Effort"[/url] (Worktodo format list of unfactored and unassigned exponents from 2 to 1000000, that have been trial factored up to 69 bits, to bring them to 70 bits.) Jacob 
[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;561656]I would like to run TF on the range 020M from lowest bit to 6970 bits but I can’t seem to manage to download a sample file to try it. Also I have an account on GPU72 and can’t get them from them. Help please?[/QUOTE]
Perhaps you should start out with something more manageable? Here is the lowest 0.1M range with more than 2000 unfactored exponents: [url]https://www.mersenne.org/report_factoring_effort/?exp_lo=3100000&exp_hi=3200000&bits_lo=1&bits_hi=69&txt=1&exassigned=1&tfonly=1&worktodo=1&tftobits=70[/url] 
Just wanted to trial on my old GPU, thank you guys.

All times are UTC. The time now is 23:29. 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000  2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.