Got this:

[code]Thu Sep 16 07:38:14 2010
Thu Sep 16 07:38:14 2010
Thu Sep 16 07:38:14 2010 Msieve v. 1.47
Thu Sep 16 08:19:01 2010 building initial matrix
Thu Sep 16 08:22:27 2010 memory use: 2400.0 MB
Thu Sep 16 08:22:35 2010 read 6507711 cycles
Thu Sep 16 08:22:36 2010 matrix is 6507534 x 6507711 (2172.8 MB) with weight 630534883 (96.89/col)
Thu Sep 16 08:22:36 2010 sparse part has weight 498001196 (76.52/col)
Thu Sep 16 08:23:34 2010 filtering completed in 2 passes
Thu Sep 16 08:23:35 2010 matrix is 6507000 x 6507177 (2172.8 MB) with weight 630519782 (96.90/col)
Thu Sep 16 08:23:35 2010 sparse part has weight 497996534 (76.53/col)
Thu Sep 16 08:24:24 2010 matrix starts at (0, 0)
Thu Sep 16 08:24:26 2010 matrix is 6507000 x 6507177 (2172.8 MB) with weight 630519782 (96.90/col)
Thu Sep 16 08:24:26 2010 sparse part has weight 497996534 (76.53/col)
Thu Sep 16 08:24:26 2010 saving the first 48 matrix rows for later
Thu Sep 16 08:24:28 2010 matrix includes 64 packed rows
Thu Sep 16 08:24:29 2010 matrix is 6506952 x 6507177 (2068.7 MB) with weight 516887531 (79.43/col)
Thu Sep 16 08:24:29 2010 sparse part has weight 477218263 (73.34/col)
Thu Sep 16 08:24:29 2010 using block size 262144 for processor cache size 8192 kB
Thu Sep 16 08:24:40 2010 commencing Lanczos iteration (4 threads)
Thu Sep 16 08:24:40 2010 memory use: 2528.5 MB
Thu Sep 16 08:25:30 2010 linear algebra at 0.0%, ETA 57h26m
Thu Sep 16 08:25:46 2010 checkpointing every 120000 dimensions
Thu Sep 16 09:54:31 2010 [B]error: corrupt state, please restart from checkpoint[/B][/code]

[quote=jasonp;225368]Carlos: interesting! v1.46 has more multithreading in the LA and so will probably push the memory bus harder than v1.45 did.[/quote]

I suppose my issue I posted earlier was due to the fact I had overclocked even more the processor. I think for sure v1.47 pushes even harder for the processor than v1.45 but yet not as much as prime95.

[QUOTE=em99010pepe;230059]I suppose my issue I posted earlier was due to the fact I had overclocked even more the processor.[/QUOTE]

So that's the same thing causing errors with LLRnet2010.

Overclocking and expecting programs working correct is foolish.

No it is not. With your arrogance you were assuming I was running the cores in the same conditions for LLR, msieve or srsieve. As usual you judge people without knowing the background.To run LLR I underclock all my processores by 15 %. They run stable, I find primes and confirmed primes.

[QUOTE=em99010pepe;230072]No it is not.[/QUOTE]

Sure it was overclocking! To remember see [url=http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=209967&postcount=43]here[/url].

Point.

I don\'t have issues with prpclient or LLR standard client, only with llrnet client at the same conditions.As I said before I am not going to waste my time with you.Best Regards,Carlos

[QUOTE=em99010pepe;230059]I suppose my issue I posted earlier was due to the fact I had overclocked even more the processor. I think for sure v1.47 pushes even harder for the processor than v1.45 but yet not as much as prime95.[/QUOTE]
Do you get stable operation with less overclocking? And you get computation errors with Prime95 earlier than with msieve? The latter somewhat surprises me, because I'd heard reports of the opposite.

Back in 2000 when all the overclockers posted on usenet newsgroups there were endless arguments about how much of it was a good idea. None of it convinced anyone of anything.

[quote=jasonp;230093]Do you get stable operation with less overclocking? And you get computation errors with Prime95 earlier than with msieve? The latter somewhat surprises me, because I'd heard reports of the opposite.
[/quote]

1st question: yes. 2nd question: yes.

[quote=em99010pepe;230095]1st question: yes. 2nd question: yes.[/quote]

[B]For the same ambient conditions (Summer) and running two machines at the same room space[/B]

On my core i5 msieve v1.47 is table until 177 x 21 = 3717 MHz but with v1.45 I can go up to 180 x 21. Temps are under 60 ºC while doing LA on 4 cores using 6GB of memory.
177 x 21 is also stable for running srsieve, NFS@home and ecm but these two last programs put the CPU at ~68 ºC.

Prime95 (or LLR/cLLR prpclient) is only stable to run until ~165 x 21.

CPU vcore is a little bit increased but right now I don't know how much, probably +6,25 mV or +12,50 mV. Other settings are also changed to have as much as possible a stable CPU overclock.

When factoring relatively small numbers...

[CODE]
Msieve v. 1.46
Thu Sep 23 21:07:13 2010
random seeds: 1ca18188 9c4fe088
factoring 1000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
000000000000000000000031 (94 digits)
searching for 15-digit factors
commencing number field sieve (94-digit input)
R0: -16666666666666666666665
R1: 1
A0: 100031
A1: 240000
A2: 216000
A3: 86400
A4: 12960
skew 1.67, size 4.691e-010, alpha -0.608, combined = 4.730e-007 rroots = 0
commencing linear algebra
read 45827 cycles
cycles contain 154995 unique relations
read 154995 relations
using 20 quadratic characters above 33362292
building initial matrix
memory use: 15.6 MB
read 45827 cycles
matrix is 45644 x 45827 (13.2 MB) with weight 4156628 (90.70/col)
sparse part has weight 3127744 (68.25/col)
filtering completed in 1 passes
matrix is 45644 x 45827 (13.2 MB) with weight 4156628 (90.70/col)
sparse part has weight 3127744 (68.25/col)
matrix starts at (0, 0)
matrix is 45644 x 45827 (13.2 MB) with weight 4156628 (90.70/col)
sparse part has weight 3127744 (68.25/col)
saving the first 48 matrix rows for later
matrix includes 64 packed rows
matrix is 45596 x 45827 (12.2 MB) with weight 3290658 (71.81/col)
sparse part has weight 2925713 (63.84/col)
using block size 18238 for processor cache size 3072 kB
commencing Lanczos iteration
memory use: 9.3 MB
<Msieve crashed at this point>
Return value 65280. Terminating...
[/CODE]

What happened?

[QUOTE=Merfighters;231091]When factoring relatively small numbers...
...
What happened?[/QUOTE]

I don't know. Here's some advice while waiting for a better answer: sieve a few more relations and try again.