[QUOTE=frmky;285420]Exactly. But these are Core 2 quads with DDR2 memory, and I've found it's faster to use only 2 cores on each rather than all four.[/QUOTE]

Ah yes: eight machines, so 16 DDR2 memory controllers, and you're getting speeds comparable (I think a bit slower) to the 16 DDR3 memory controllers in my ridiculous single machine.

1051_71_minus1 is done. Post-processing 698419_37_minus1. 293_97_minus1 in standby schedule to start within 13 hours. I suppose the latter will take ~150 hours.

[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;285699]1051_71_minus1 is done. Post-processing 698419_37_minus1. 293_97_minus1 in standby schedule to start within 13 hours. I suppose the latter will take ~150 hours.[/QUOTE]
698419_37_minus1 is done, started 293_97_minus1 but still in filtering phase so can't post yet LA ETA.

[QUOTE=pinhodecarlos;285826]698419_37_minus1 is done, started 293_97_minus1 but still in filtering phase so can't post yet LA ETA.[/QUOTE]

~180 hours so 293_97_minus1 can be moved to to the "postprocessing" state.

I'll take 269_101_minus1 next.

I would like to reserve 917087137_23_minus1

20003_245 is done:
[CODE]prp55 factor: 6397592281888306385172750508836130410647589273710135869
prp95 factor: 15176510844417676322078085602490646507276983688902079473476701244300421692052915503455058979721
prp97 factor: 2059878003651738705074583981500086714416914728639047071846532324077474145687339476014622364979847
[/CODE]

[QUOTE=frmky;286023]20003_245 is done:
[CODE]prp55 factor: 6397592281888306385172750508836130410647589273710135869
prp95 factor: 15176510844417676322078085602490646507276983688902079473476701244300421692052915503455058979721
prp97 factor: 2059878003651738705074583981500086714416914728639047071846532324077474145687339476014622364979847
[/CODE][/QUOTE]

This one was really an ECM miss..20710 curves were done at B1=11e7 and 4826 at B1=26e7!
[url]http://hpcgi2.nifty.com/m_kamada/f/c.cgi?q=20003_245[/url]

Boo, a p55 remaining after, according to the near-repdigit site, 20710 curves at B1=11e7 and 4826 curves at B1=26e7 ? That was fairly unlikely.
Not that cutting this factor would have made the number easier to factor by GNFS than by SNFS, but sieving would have been faster...

[QUOTE=debrouxl;286039]but sieving would have been faster...[/QUOTE]
Really? I wouldn't have thought so. Maybe the SQRT phase (but even that is doubtful). Anyone care to weigh in?

I [i]think[/i] I read this on MersenneForum recently. But maybe I invented :smile: