The last one was to 332599979 (not 32599979).

Here it is for 332192831 to 332399999:
A total of 6181 exponents have been factored out. 7624 factors have been found. Average bit level of the found factors 44.3 (same as the broader range) Effective 'effort' (less the 2 factors presumed to be found by P-1): 788,646
[CODE]Bit Count
29 347
30 221
31 277
32 319
33 301
34 339
35 296
36 285
37 266
38 268
39 275
40 252
41 254
42 229
43 234
44 238
45 240
46 242
47 210
48 209
49 207
50 189
51 189
52 163
53 121
54 119
55 108
56 100
57 88
58 84
59 96
60 84
61 91
62 83
63 72
64 84
65 78
66 52
67 73
68 69
69 65
70 26
71 11
72 14
73 9
74 7
75 9
76 4
77 3
78 1
79 0
80 0
81 0
82 0
83 0
84 1
85 0
86 0
87 0
88 0
89 0
90 0
91 0
92 1[/CODE]

Thank you, Uncwilly!

M332214409 has a factor: 244701274525241425768649
found 1 factor(s) for M332214409 from 2^77 to 2^78 [mfaktc 0.14-pre4 barrett79_mul32]

Outside the usual TF limit (2^77) and [B]far far away[/B] from being catched with P-1! :smile:

The k of the factor is 368288171578436 = 2 * 2 * [B]92072042894609[/B]

Oliver

[QUOTE=TheJudger;243872]M332214409 has a factor: 244701274525241425768649[/QUOTE]There have recently been several factors found in the first 500 to 600 exponents that remain.

I have started changing over all of my cores to do only XX to 74 bits. On my home machine I grab the very lowest below 74. On the work machines, I do those that are a little bit further along. If the GPU folks can keep an eye out for these exponents: [URL="http://v5www.mersenne.org/report_factoring_effort/?exp_lo=332192831&exp_hi=332249999&bits_lo=74&bits_hi=77&txt=1&exassigned=1&B1=Get+Data"]>73 and <78[/URL] If they disappear then move it down to =73.

[QUOTE=TheJudger;243872]
M332214409 has a factor: 244701274525241425768649
found 1 factor(s) for M332214409 from 2^77 to 2^78 [mfaktc 0.14-pre4 barrett79_mul32]

Outside the usual TF limit (2^77) and [B]far far away[/B] from being catched with P-1! :smile:

Oliver[/QUOTE]

It´s funny that in the Cleared Exponents report it is listed as a P-1 find. Could it be because the factor is larger than the default level for this exponent size?

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;243895]There have recently been several factors found in the first 500 to 600 exponents that remain.

I have started changing over all of my cores to do only XX to 74 bits. On my home machine I grab the very lowest below 74. On the work machines, I do those that are a little bit further along. If the GPU folks can keep an eye out for these exponents: [URL="http://v5www.mersenne.org/report_factoring_effort/?exp_lo=332192831&exp_hi=332249999&bits_lo=74&bits_hi=77&txt=1&exassigned=1&B1=Get+Data"]>73 and <78[/URL] If they disappear then move it down to =73.[/QUOTE]

I'll try. Usually I just use the manual testing forms to get some assigments, I choose TF and an optional range starting at 332192810 (and no upper limit). I can't remember that I've received assignments below 2^74 in the last few months.


[QUOTE=lycorn;244018]It´s funny that in the Cleared Exponents report it is listed as a P-1 find. Could it be because the factor is larger than the default level for this exponent size?[/QUOTE]

Yep, right! Primenet "assumes" those factors are found by P-1 stage 1 with a fixed(?) B1 value if they are above thy default TF level.

Olier

[QUOTE=TheJudger;244028]I'll try. Usually I just use the manual testing forms to get some assigments, I choose TF and an optional range starting at 332192810 (and no upper limit). I can't remember that I've received assignments below 2^74 in the last few months.[/QUOTE]That is what I am trying to keep from happening. Someone in another thread was talking about getting lower bit level expo and running them on a GPU. If we keep working at it, I think that we should be able to make sure that all 100M expos that are handed out for LL will have all of the TF'ing done (to at least 78.) I was trying to give a handy link for the newbies too. And since all of the first 1240 are to 71 (and 730 to 72) and only 685 assigned to LL (that number varies but stays about there), I think that focusing (at least by my CPU's) on deeper (more to 74) rather than wider (lots more to 70 or 71) is prudent.

WHAT?!?
 

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;243895]I have started changing over all of my cores to do only XX to 74 bits. On my home machine I grab the very lowest below 74. On the work machines, I do those that are a little bit further along. If the GPU folks can keep an eye out for these exponents: [URL="http://v5www.mersenne.org/report_factoring_effort/?exp_lo=332192831&exp_hi=332249999&bits_lo=74&bits_hi=77&txt=1&exassigned=1&B1=Get+Data"]>73 and <78[/URL] If they disappear then move it down to =73.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;244051]Someone in another thread was talking about getting lower bit level expo and running them on a GPU. If we keep working at it, I think that we should be able to make sure that all 100M expos that are handed out for LL will have all of the TF'ing done (to at least 78.) I was trying to give a handy link for the newbies too. And since all of the first 1240 are to 71 (and 730 to 72) and only 685 assigned to LL (that number varies but stays about there), I think that focusing (at least by my CPU's) on deeper (more to 74) rather than wider (lots more to 70 or 71) is prudent.[/QUOTE]
:shock:
Some one or several people have picked up a big bunch exponents that were at 73 and 72. If there are that many that are actually going to get processed, it seems that I may have to move my machines all down to moving exponents up to 72 instead. Or start clearing the land in the broader range.
:shock:

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;245025]:shock:
Some one or several people have picked up a big bunch exponents that were at 73 and 72. If there are that many that are actually going to get processed, it seems that I may have to move my machines all down to moving exponents up to 72 instead. Or start clearing the land in the broader range.
:shock:[/QUOTE]

It looks like it was [B]geschwen[/B]

I am not sure who that is.

I try to keep the various cores I have withe about 20 assigned. I am really working on the 70 - 71 range.

Grant

[QUOTE=gjmccrac;245061]It looks like it was [B]geschwen[/B]

I am not sure who that is.
[/QUOTE]

My gpu will try to process all the TF-assignments, however, in order. 70,71 - 72,73 - 73,74 - 74,75 to 75,76. No idea how long it will take.

[QUOTE=moebius;245069]My gpu will try to process all the TF-assignments, however, in order. 70,71 - 72,73 - 73,74 - 74,75 to 75,76. No idea how long it will take.[/QUOTE]
Do you mean that you are grabbing 70's and when they are gone grabbing 71's? Or do you mean that you grab some expos and run them all the way to 76?

If it is the first, could you instead grab the smallest exponents that are below 76 and work on them up to 76 (or maybe higher, like 78 or 80)? This will let the folks with CPU's work in the 70 to ~74 range.

If the latter, could you still try to focus on the smallest available exponents? That way we can be sure that when they go to an LL tester they are up to the desired bit level. I think that with some focus by the group we can get enough done that no LL gets handed out (in this range) that is not at least to 78.

[B]Again, any and all help is welcomed.[/B] I will continue to put my GHz/days to work were I think will best benefit the project.

As a follow up, this graphic illustrates where, I think, the best efforts are made by the 2 classes of processors.

The yellow boxed area should be the main focus of the GPU's, especially trending to the upper left. The blue box should be the main focus of the CPU's, with the slower CPU's working on the lowest part and to the right. The green box is where there is some overlap. I have been working to move the left edge of that box toward the right. Ideally over time the balance between the two types will make a nice smooth chart. Right now the LL assignments that haven't TF'ed enough are making it look real ragged.