[QUOTE=jinydu;140160]What machines are being used for the verifications? That isn't too much of a hint, is it? :wink:[/QUOTE]This one looks like it might be one of the machines being used: [URL="https://www.sharcnet.ca/my/systems/show/12"]https://www.sharcnet.ca/my/systems/show/12[/URL] [B][U]or[/U][/B] part of this one [URL="https://www.sharcnet.ca/my/systems/show/1"]https://www.sharcnet.ca/my/systems/show/1[/URL]

And one of the others might be something like this: [URL="http://www.bull.com/novascale/NovaScale6160.php"]http://www.bull.com/novascale/NovaScale6160.php[/URL]

[QUOTE=jinydu;140160]What machines are being used for the verifications? That isn't too much of a hint, is it? :wink:[/QUOTE]

If you look at the press release from previous ones, you can figure out what kind of system I am running it on. :smile: I think I can also reveal that the other verification is not using the same architecture so in the end we will have completed tests using 3 different software implementations on 3 different architectures.

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;140172]This one looks like it might be one of the machines being used: [URL="https://www.sharcnet.ca/my/systems/show/12"]https://www.sharcnet.ca/my/systems/show/12[/URL] [B][U]or[/U][/B] part of this one [URL="https://www.sharcnet.ca/my/systems/show/1"]https://www.sharcnet.ca/my/systems/show/1[/URL]
[/QUOTE]

Wrong. Right site, wrong system though. I am doing one of the verifications and so far Tony is not.

Jeff.

[quote=Jeff Gilchrist;140176]If you look at the press release from previous ones, you can figure out what kind of system I am running it on. :smile: I think I can also reveal that the other verification is not using the same architecture so in the end we will have completed tests using 3 different software implementations on 3 different architectures.[/quote]
[URL]http://www.mersenne.org/32582657.htm[/URL]
[quote]A second verification was completed by Jeff Gilchrist of Elytra Enterprises Inc. in Ottawa, Canada using 11 days of time on 16 CPUs of an Itanium2 1.6 GHz server at SHARCNET.[/quote]Estimate for M45 is 2 weeks, which should make it a decent margin larger, putting it well into 10M digit territory. 32582657 (M44)/11 (days last time)*14 (days this time) = 41468836 (approx. M45)
I know this is a very rough number and the extra digits give false precision, but hey still a rough estimate. This is still pretty close to several curtisc numbers. Out of four that I see as likely, one is curtisc.
My new M45 guess is AC77C9ED.

[quote=Jeff Gilchrist;140176]If you look at the press release from previous ones, you can figure out what kind of system I am running it on. :smile: [/quote]

And that you took 11 days to verify M44.
With the estimates of Sept 8th and 12th given by George, I think
we can confidently expect well over 10M digits.
Is Ernst the other verifier? Where is Tony?

David

[QUOTE=davieddy;140184]And that you took 11 days to verify M44.
With the estimates of Sept 8th and 12th given by George, I think
we can confidently expect well over 10M digits.
Is Ernst the other verifier? Where is Tony?

David[/QUOTE]

What if in the meanwhile they upgraded their processors? :smile:

Luigi

[quote=ET_;140185]What if in the meanwhile they upgraded their processors? :smile:

Luigi[/quote]
Then the estimated size of M45 would be bigger.

[quote=ET_;140185]What if in the meanwhile they upgraded their processors? :smile:

Luigi[/quote]
Jeff said that if you look at old press releases, it'll say the system he's running, heavily implying that he's running it on the same, or an equivalent, system.

See post #123 for the probable candidates.
I note that curtisc has no fewer than 4 horses in the race:smile:

[QUOTE=davieddy;140184]And that you took 11 days to verify M44.
With the estimates of Sept 8th and 12th given by George, I think
we can confidently expect well over 10M digits.
[/QUOTE]

While the system hasn't been upgraded, it is a shared system and is very busy right now so this verification is running slower than M44 since it was lightly loaded at that time.

[quote=Jeff Gilchrist;140196]While the system hasn't been upgraded, it is a shared system and is very busy right now so this verification is running slower than M44 since it was lightly loaded at that time.[/quote]
32582657/11*14*.9=37321953 (same things as last time, but with a 10% reduction)
My guess knowing this is 99EC161B.

I don't suppose you'd let us know the exact average time per iteration then and now, huh?