another factor
 

M31080983 has a factor: 787976240107172165047 [TF:69:70:mfaktc 0.20 barrett76_mul32_gs]

[QUOTE=chalsall;326048]Sorry -- doing a complete back-up in preparation of a potential big announcement. It will be back shortly....[/QUOTE]

Sorry everyone. That took longer than expected...

She's back.

[QUOTE=chalsall;326048]...a potential big announcement....[/QUOTE]

Your's or George's?

[QUOTE=petrw1;326055]Your's or George's?[/QUOTE]
Let me guess.. GPU72 is with child? GPU73?

[QUOTE=petrw1;326055]Your's or George's?[/QUOTE]

George's.

The "SlashDot Effect" can bring unwanted attention....

I pulled 200 DCs and the 2nd one had a factor:
got assignment: exp=31110319 bit_min=69 bit_max=70 (3.84 GHz-days)
Starting trial factoring M31110319 from 2^69 to 2^70 (3.84 GHz-days)
k_min = 9487138500840
k_max = 18974277003032
Using GPU kernel "barrett76_mul32_gs"
Date Time | class Pct | time ETA | GHz-d/day Sieve Wait
Jan 26 21:34 | 3896 84.4% | 0.845 2m07s | 409.34 69941 n.a.%
M31110319 has a factor: 718932871683122603489
found 1 factor for M31110319 from 2^69 to 2^70 (partially tested) [mfaktc 0.20 barrett76_mul32_gs]
tf(): total time spent: 11m 26.995s

409 ghz days/day at this range. I am not sure why the ghz/day goes up based on the range I'm factoring. Shoudn't the smaller numbers be worth less days if they factor so much more quickly?

Wow, I missed a big discussion. Since you seem to have the firepower working, I will continue with my 33M to 71 runs. I've had the 'crossover' discussion with Larv too many times already (back when CPUs affected the outcome), but looking at what has been posted, 12 min per = 5 per hour, 20 hour LL = 1 LL per 100 TF. 80-120 TF per LL is considered the 'gray' zone, some feel it is not worth it, some do. The problem here has always come down to, as George pointed out, 'apples and oranges'. Suffice it to say, if some people think it worthwhile, what's wrong with letting them do it?

bcp19: it is a volunteer project so you are free to do what you want. LLTF is still the most useful for the project as a whole. As davieddy said (and he is right this one time) taking 31M to 70 is like taking 62M to 74 and we are having trouble making sure all 62M will be at 73 let alone 74.

But whatever floats your boat. Everything helps. My observation was simply that 31M to 70 is better than 33M to 71.

[QUOTE=swl551;326050]M31080983 has a factor: 787976240107172165047 [TF:69:70:mfaktc 0.20 barrett76_mul32_gs][/QUOTE]

Chris, should we continue processing this range or go back to our regular work?

I did my 200, got 3 factors.
That is, I got some profit, having cleared 3 expos in the time I would only clear 2 by DCLL.
I was lucky :D
Not convincing.
I will take 100 more.

I also reserved 100 DC 31M tasks, my 480 and 470 should start working on them in about ~1 hour.