[QUOTE=Mark Rose;483684]It's a thing Chris is working on. He's using my GPUs to squeeze out another bit level before they get assigned for DC. My turn around time on DCTF is about 2 days and I'm DCTFing about 70 per day.[/QUOTE]

Just to speak further to this...

I asked Mark if it would be OK to assign his GPUs some low TF'ing work, where it technically wouldn't make sense (economic cross-over point). He agreed. He can do [URL="https://www.gpu72.com/reports/workers/dctf/week/"]about 75 a day in that range[/URL].

I then very carefully reserved a few hundred candidates above the "wave-front" and started feeding Mark's GPUs the work. Once he started turning in results I then reserved the rest. In parallel to this, I had my two little GPUs do Cat 0 and 1 work which was about to expire.

Read: I was *very* careful not to "starve" the DC workers. And this was done with the intention of helping GIMPS; between Mark and myself we've [URL="https://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/20/3/4000"]eliminated 17 candidates from having to be DC'ed[/URL].

[QUOTE=chalsall;483770]And this was done with the intention of helping GIMPS; between Mark and myself we've [URL="https://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/20/3/4000"]eliminated 17 candidates from having to be DC'ed[/URL].[/QUOTE]

Just to follow up on this...

Mark and I had [URL="https://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/30/3/4000"]an unexpected "rate of return" on this[/URL]. 27 candidates eliminated by way of TF'ing, with only 1,564 runs from 72 to 73 (nominal would have been ~16).

[QUOTE=chalsall;484293]Mark and I had [URL="https://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/30/3/4000"]an unexpected "rate of return" on this[/URL]. 27 candidates eliminated by way of TF'ing, with only 1,564 runs from 72 to 73 (nominal would have been ~16).[/QUOTE]
Good for you! I love when we eliminate exponents with a kill (factor found).

[QUOTE]I asked Mark if it would be OK to assign his GPUs some low TF'ing work, where it technically wouldn't make sense (economic cross-over point). He agreed. He can do [URL="https://www.gpu72.com/reports/workers/dctf/week/"]about 75 a day in that range[/URL].[/QUOTE]
I was gratified to see my two modest (GTX xx60s) GPUs still holding in at tenth place. I am astounded that the long-departed and much-missed "Pete" is still [U][B]#8[/B][/U] though he has been inactive here for years. He pulled out in disgust regarding all the noise and battles surrounding the banned davieddy, though there may have been other conflicts that disturbed him. :picard:

Great News:
April 8, 2018 All tests below M(43 112 609) are verified, officially making it the 47th Mersenne prime. :smile:

[QUOTE=kladner;484455] the banned davieddy,[/QUOTE]
Was David banned? I am under the impression he just vanished...
Might be wrong, though.

[QUOTE=lycorn;484805]Was David banned? I am under the impression he just vanished...
Might be wrong, though.[/QUOTE]
I regret to inform you that he did not jump. He was pushed, with considerable cause. EDIT: .....as well as with great regret. :davieddy:

Why does [URL="https://mersenne.org/M77998639"]M77998639[/URL] not have an expiration day?

[url]https://www.mersenne.org/assignments/?exp_lo=77000000&exp_hi=78000000&execm=1&exdchk=1&exp1=1&extf=1[/url]

[QUOTE=ATH;484909]Why does [URL="https://mersenne.org/M77998639"]M77998639[/URL] not have an expiration day?

[url]https://www.mersenne.org/assignments/?exp_lo=77000000&exp_hi=78000000&execm=1&exdchk=1&exp1=1&extf=1[/url][/QUOTE]So far there has been no answer to my query of the same.

[url]http://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?p=484730#post484730[/url]

It must be a prime 🤔

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;484914]It must be a prime 🤔[/QUOTE]And the three other missing numbers must also be prime. It's all a huge conspiracy! :exclaim: