[QUOTE=kracker;322869]I'll be (trying) to get 332.4 to 71.[/QUOTE]The data bear this out. Nice to see a bunch of factors being found.

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;316111]Oops, he did it again. From 82 to 83. That is a 2,948 GHz-Days credit!![/QUOTE]
[url]http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=332250257&exp_hi=&B1=Get+status[/url]
:shock:
16 GHz-years!!!
:shock::fusion::shock::bow wave::shock:
:huh2:

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;323266]16 GHz-years!!![/QUOTE]

Confusing units, we are?

[QUOTE=ckdo;323287]Confusing units, we are?[/QUOTE]

83-84

[COLOR=Red][B]G[/B][/COLOR]Hz-days?

[url]http://www.mersenne.ca/credit.php?worktype=TF&exponent=332250257&f_exponent=&b1=&b2=&numcurves=&factor=&frombits=83&tobits=84&submitbutton=Calculate[/url]

I am still not clear what is the specific confusion that you have :(

Fine. After a few :coffee::coffee: I realized Uncwilly actually wrote GHz-years and not GHz-days. :whistle:

Still, what's the conversion factor? A GHz-day is well defined. A THz-day and such are pretty obvious.

But how many GHz-hours are in a GHz-day? How many GHz-days in a GHz-[week|month|year]? :confused:

[QUOTE=ckdo;323306]But how many GHz-hours are in a GHz-day? How many GHz-days in a GHz-[week|month|year]? :confused:[/QUOTE]I think we can assume SI days (24 hours = 1 day, no leap seconds).
The length of a year varies depending on who you ask, from 365.242 to 365.259636 days, but we can stick with the [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_year_(astronomy)]Julian Year[/url] of exactly 365.25 days (of 86400 seconds each).

So for the TF in question, worth 5895.95901053 GHz-days would give:
365.25 = 16.142256 GHz-years
but could range from 16.142610 (+0.00219%) to 16.141830 (-0.00264%)

In any case "16 GHz-years" is plenty close enough. :smile:

I'd propose, if such units were to be standardized:
GHz-week = GHz-day * 7 (although I wouldn't actually use this)
GHz-year = GHz-day * 365.25
THz-day = GHz-day * 1000
THz-year = GHz-day * 365250

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;323266][url]http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=332250257&exp_hi=&B1=Get+status[/url]
:shock:
16 GHz-years!!![/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=axn;323288]83-84[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=James Heinrich;323310]So for the TF in question, worth 5895.95901053 GHz-days would give:
365.25 = 16.142256 GHz-years[/QUOTE]To put this in perspective, I have attached a graphic, which is the current version of the one post [URL="http://mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=308730&postcount=377"]here[/URL]. Notice that the one exponent accounts for more work than: [COLOR="Blue"]the 72 bits and the 74 bits put together[/COLOR] [B]or[/B] [COLOR="DarkRed"]the 73 bits and the 75 bits and the 78 bits put together[/COLOR] [B]or[/B] [COLOR="Green"]all 5 at 81 bits put together[/COLOR]. Next time I post a graph of the effort expended over time you will see a jump that that single expo is responsible for.

Wish I had 1 or 2 GPU's at my disposal.

Wish I had more than one gpu for my use.

[QUOTE=Uncwilly;323314]which is the current version of the one post [URL="http://mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=308730&postcount=377"]here[/URL]. [/QUOTE]
Don't understand why there are more exponents now than then? (over 700k, against under 700k, if I correctly read the 0x scale?
Personally, I am waiting for mfaktc 0.20 to be realeased, then I will pump a new factoring session on this range.