[QUOTE=Batalov;176484]...and check if they are testing the same number. :whistle:[/QUOTE]

Ahhh... I see now. ATH is checking George's fake number.

That explains the difference.

Saturday 11PM USA CentralTime
 

Hi,

Sorry to be late. Yesterday night I read a nice book and this morning I got out of bed quite late...

Here are my residues:
[QUOTE]1000000. Res64: B888A4E085915350.
2000000. Res64: E58A6CA45863341A.
3000000. Res64: 48267344B9976A4D.
4000000. Res64: 105007A65A192DF9.
5000000. Res64: 07558BC6A5CA6316.
6000000. Res64: DDA6FFB348406535.
7000000. Res64: 5B6E2DD6BED1522F.
8000000. Res64: 49ACB295D7CC12F0.
9000000. Res64: DD4944B9CF3F5B57.
10000000. Res64: 90364B7EFE41F6B9.
11000000. Res64: 40BDCA076003C665.
12000000. Res64: 1CF37CC4CB255E9E.
13000000. Res64: 5E34A04A5D83BB7A.[/QUOTE]

So, the machine is still running fine (no crash during the week-end !!).
And Rob and I have the same residues !

It seems that my verification should end this Sunday 6am France time, which is Sunday 0am USA EastCoast time or Saturday 11pm CentralTime.
(My data: run started Friday 4pm France time. About 0.0175 sec/iter .)

Now: 31.80% done.

Tony

[QUOTE=rgiltrap;176486]Ahhh... I see now. ATH is checking George's fake number.

That explains the difference.[/QUOTE]Oh, this is good news, I think. If that means what I think it means, then we (the unwashed masses) are currently being duped by a false zero residue? That is more like what I expect to see from the GIMPS guys. :grin:

[QUOTE=Primeinator;176470]That doesn't sound good. Perhaps Kevin and Tony should post their results for the corresponding residues. If we get too many different results I will be willing to double-check the exponent as well but I will wait until there is need to do so (if that ever arises).[/QUOTE]

If you are doing a double-check test, maybe you hit the routine that exchange bits and only checks final residue.

Luigi

[QUOTE=rgiltrap;176486]Ahhh... I see now. ATH is checking George's fake number.

That explains the difference.[/QUOTE]
So, is the real number bigger or smaller than M43112609?

[QUOTE=petrw1;176258]About the same time the excitement over the new prime started the TFLOPS graph from PrimeNet 5.0 Summary has been steadily dropping to now half of what it was 72 hours ago.

Has "everyone" suspended other work to DoubleCheck this one? :smile::smile:[/QUOTE]

Now it has shot back up again and more! Very odd. As if part of the Internet was cut off for a few days or something. Or maybe just another Primenet bug now corrected?

Sunday 7:20am France time
 

Last estimation of end of verification: Sunday 7:20am France time.
USA CentralTime 0:20am.

T.

[quote=lfm;176516]Now it has shot back up again and more! Very odd. As if part of the Internet was cut off for a few days or something. Or maybe just another Primenet bug now corrected?[/quote]
look at [url]http://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=5758[/url]
it is possible that the v4 bridge broke for a little while
that might be what caused what you saw

So are you using the 8xNehalem now?

[QUOTE=rgiltrap;176486]Ahhh... I see now. ATH is checking George's fake number.

That explains the difference.[/QUOTE]

Ok, I was wondering if there was a fake this time. I didn't read this thread until 12h after creation, so I knew it might be fake. I was surprised it still wasn't hidden on the server after so long. Well I can stop factoring (2[sup]p[/sup]+1)/3 also then.

Anyone could PM or email me the real one? I would like to start the run I normally do to check the penultimate LL step.

[QUOTE=ATH;176529]Anyone could PM or email me the real one? I would like to start the run I normally do to check the penultimate LL step.[/QUOTE]PM'ed