How does one get 0.0000 points???
 

At the bottom of every top-producers report are a handful of users with 0.0000 points. Except for the case of finding a very small factor (<60 bits) how does someone get 0.0000 points?

I am assuming you do NOT appear on the report until you have completed an assignment and submitted the result...is this where I err?

Is it from submitting results later deemed invalid?

Revelation: I think it just might be that they are on the report because they have results OLDER than 365 days but none in the last 365 days. By default the Top Producers reports are for the last 365 days.

[QUOTE=RMAC9.5;166839]However, the [B]overall[/B] rankings for the [B]total amount of work[/B] done should be the [B]same[/B] if the total Lifetime and Last 365 Days GHz values are the [B]same[/B] (which they were).[/QUOTE]Life's not so simple - your ranking depends on others' GHz values also. Once someone has been collecting v5 credits for more than a year, their 365 day running total can go up and down, depending on how credits in the last 24 hours compare to the 24 hours a year ago. (It stays less than their lifetime total, though, obviously.) So you might stand still in GHz but gain in ranking while someone else slips below you. The overall total works the same as its components.
[QUOTE=RMAC9.5;166839]I understood how individual LL, TF, ECM, etc. rankings could vary between Lifetime and Last 365 Days depending on each user's imported V4 credits.[/QUOTE]I think the only effect of the imported v4 credits will be when they drop out of the 365 day running total. (Or if someone still has some to link in, there'd be an effect then.)

[QUOTE=petrw1;166409]I have retired (replaced) an old CPU.

If I drop it from the Computer Details report will I KEEP all my Results, User points, Team points, etc., etc?

Do I lose any stats?
Are there any risks?
Is there any reason I should NOT drop it?

Thanks[/QUOTE]

:bump:

v4_computers question
 

When I review my Computer Details on PrimeNet 5.0, I see one v4_computers entry which shows my accumulated GHz-Hrs from PrimeNet 4.0, but it also is marked as "At least one cpu is 90 days or more unreported and appears lost." My Work Results Details show that two of the exponents that my "v4" computers started processing were completed by one of my "v5" computers:

[SIZE=2]CPU Name[/SIZE][SIZE=2]ExponentResultType[/SIZE][SIZE=2]Received[/SIZE][SIZE=2]age[/SIZE][SIZE=2]days[/SIZE][SIZE=2]Result[/SIZE][SIZE=2]GHzDays[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]Theresa[/SIZE][SIZE=2]45358069[/SIZE][SIZE=2]C[/SIZE][SIZE=2]2009-03-04 21:01[/SIZE][SIZE=2]55.3[/SIZE][SIZE=2]C13B67A2B7DAC5__[/SIZE][SIZE=2]78.7466[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]Theresa[/SIZE][SIZE=2]45358021[/SIZE][SIZE=2]C[/SIZE][SIZE=2]2009-03-04 21:01[/SIZE][SIZE=2]55.3[/SIZE][SIZE=2]B5A68E61CA25FF__[/SIZE][SIZE=2]78.7466[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]Harvey[/SIZE][SIZE=2]45873209[/SIZE][SIZE=2]NF-PM1[/SIZE][SIZE=2]2009-02-07 17:35[/SIZE][SIZE=2]17.5[/SIZE][SIZE=2]B1=550000, B2=14025000[/SIZE][SIZE=2]3.2327[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]Harvey[/SIZE][SIZE=2]40756141[/SIZE][SIZE=2]C[/SIZE][SIZE=2]2009-02-07 17:35[/SIZE][SIZE=2]89.3[/SIZE][SIZE=2]21F0B0348CA0C6__[/SIZE][SIZE=2]70.7572[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]Theresa[/SIZE][SIZE=2]45358021[/SIZE][SIZE=2]NF-PM1[/SIZE][SIZE=2]2009-01-21 15:06[/SIZE][SIZE=2]13.0[/SIZE][SIZE=2]B1=540000, B2=13905000[/SIZE][SIZE=2]3.3973[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]Theresa[/SIZE][SIZE=2]45358069[/SIZE][SIZE=2]NF-PM1[/SIZE][SIZE=2]2009-01-21 15:06[/SIZE][SIZE=2]13.0[/SIZE][SIZE=2]B1=540000, B2=13905000[/SIZE][SIZE=2]3.3973[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]Theresa[/SIZE][SIZE=2][COLOR=red]47828503[/COLOR][/SIZE][SIZE=2]C[/SIZE][SIZE=2]2009-01-21 15:06[/SIZE][SIZE=2]54.7[/SIZE][SIZE=2]F1B64152ACC602__[/SIZE][SIZE=2]83.0356[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]Theresa[/SIZE][SIZE=2][COLOR=red]47827553[/COLOR][/SIZE][SIZE=2]C[/SIZE][SIZE=2]2009-01-21 15:06[/SIZE][SIZE=2]54.7[/SIZE][SIZE=2]E78F90A72E1154__[/SIZE][SIZE=2]83.0339[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]Harvey[/SIZE][SIZE=2]45358303[/SIZE][SIZE=2]NF-PM1[/SIZE][SIZE=2]2009-01-21 04:44[/SIZE][SIZE=2]12.6[/SIZE][SIZE=2]B1=540000, B2=13905000[/SIZE][SIZE=2]3.3973[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]Harvey[/SIZE][SIZE=2]42074939[/SIZE][SIZE=2]C[/SIZE][SIZE=2]2009-01-12 03:02[/SIZE][SIZE=2]45.2[/SIZE][SIZE=2]5657430D14FE4E__[/SIZE][SIZE=2]73.0468[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]v4_computers[/SIZE][SIZE=2][COLOR=red]47828503[/COLOR][/SIZE][SIZE=2]NF-PM1[/SIZE][SIZE=2]2008-12-27 14:55[/SIZE][SIZE=2]29.6[/SIZE][SIZE=2]B1=555000, B2=13181250[/SIZE][SIZE=2]3.3664[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]v4_computers[/SIZE][SIZE=2][COLOR=red]47827553[/COLOR][/SIZE][SIZE=2]NF-PM1[/SIZE][SIZE=2]2008-12-27 14:54[/SIZE][SIZE=2]29.6[/SIZE][SIZE=2]B1=555000, B2=13181250[/SIZE][SIZE=2]3.3664[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]v4_computers[/SIZE][SIZE=2]44039441[/SIZE][SIZE=2]C[/SIZE][SIZE=2]2008-11-27 23:54[/SIZE][SIZE=2]0.0[/SIZE][SIZE=2]C3BC6EF695AEC8__[/SIZE][SIZE=2]76.4574[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]v4_computers[/SIZE][SIZE=2]44212237[/SIZE][SIZE=2]C[/SIZE][SIZE=2]2008-11-27 23:53[/SIZE][SIZE=2]0.0[/SIZE][SIZE=2]012769E43486EF__[/SIZE][SIZE=2]76.7574[/SIZE]
[SIZE=2]v4_computers[/SIZE][SIZE=2]44212237[/SIZE][SIZE=2]NF-PM1[/SIZE][SIZE=2]2008-11-27 23:53[/SIZE][SIZE=2]0.0[/SIZE][SIZE=2]B1=530000, B2=13382500[/SIZE][SIZE=2]3.3044[/SIZE]

Is there something else I need to do to complete my v4 migration? Or should I just not worry about that "90 days unreported" flag on my v4_computers entry? Thanks for your help.

I perform double checking. I had a result that did not match the first LL test so I was not credited. How do I find which number this was without having to search everyone of my results one by one? Thanks....

[URL="http://v5www.mersenne.org/report_LL/?exp_lo=1&exp_hi=100000000&exp_date=&user_only=1&user_id=xxxx&exfactor=1&dispdate=1&B1=Get+LL+data"]Lucas-Lehmer test results - PrimeNet[/URL]

Replace xxxx with your username and click this link after having logged into Primenet.

[quote=almostfrugal;170427]
Is there something else I need to do to complete my v4 migration? Or should I just not worry about that "90 days unreported" flag on my v4_computers entry? Thanks for your help.[/quote]

Don't bother about it. I have the same flag. You seem to be fully migrated.

100,000 CPUs!!!!!!!!!!!
 

[QUOTE=petrw1;166003][QUOTE=petrw1;161581]

6 more weeks, 20,000 more CPUs. The increase in CPUs shows no sign of slowing. However, the total TFLOPS is still not increasing by much.

And I never did personnally see 80,000 CPUs in V4.

[CODE]Today's Numbers
Teams 181
Users 13199
CPUs 80162
TFLOP/s 41.446
GHz-Days 20722.979 [/CODE][/QUOTE]

At the risk of sounding like a broken record....
Another 6 weeks (no sign of slowing), 20,000 more CPUs.
And even still TFLOP/s growing slower than the CPU ratio.
5,000 more Users

[CODE]Today's Numbers
Teams 204
Users 18186
CPUs 100187
TFLOP/s 43.836
GHz-Days 21917.990 [/CODE]


Where are all the CPUs coming from (other than my son's pat answer: "From a CPU factory.") ? Is this the wave we expected after two quick MP discoveries?

Perhaps some NPR listeners in the mix too?

2 curiosities about ECM
 

I've just completed a couple hundred ECM and a couple dozen ECM-F. Every assignment except a recent one was for 3 curves. This last one for F24 was only 1 curve. Why 1?

My bigger curiosity: With V5 the decision was made on TF assignments to send intermediate results to the server after every bit level (after 63 or so). This, I understand was to reduce the risk of losing work: In v4, if I was assignmed TF 63-69 and released the assignment or quit after 68 bits all the work would be lost (wasted).

Why is not the same thing done with ECM for the same reason? If I am assigned 3 (or 10) curves would it make sense to send results after each curve to not lose the work?

ECM-F seems frugal on points.
 

My 3.4 Ghz PIV can complete a P-1 on 50M in just under 2.5 days for about 4.3 points. : about 1.75 PPD.

ECM-F (F24) just over 3 days for just over 3 points with 768M RAM: 1 PPD.

LL/DC is almost 2 PPD.