Well, I meant catch up to these new bounds. If we're ahead of the wavefront, there's no point in reserving expos as LLs -- just as TF.

Also, could you tell me which report, as far as 72 per day? The weekly progress graph gives a good idea, though I imagine it's not strictly GPU272 workers -- pretty close estimate though. (That's like 400+ per day, though I imagine in the 55+ range less of the work is us. Perhaps 350 a day for the project?)

[QUOTE=Dubslow;287942]Well, I meant catch up to these new bounds. If we're ahead of the wavefront, there's no point in reserving expos as LLs -- just as TF.[/QUOTE]

You continue to fail to understand.

We are doing more than twice as many TF to 72 as the overall system is LLing.

We are still working within the wave.

[QUOTE=Dubslow;287942]Also, could you tell me which report, as far as 72 per day? The weekly progress graph gives a good idea, though I imagine it's not strictly GPU272 workers -- pretty close estimate though. (That's like 400+ per day, though I imagine in the 55+ range less of the work is us. Perhaps 350 a day for the project?)[/QUOTE]

Compare [URL="http://www.mersenne.info/trial_factored_tabular_delta_7/2/40000000/"]this[/URL] and [URL="http://www.mersenne.info/exponent_status_tabular_delta_7/2/40000000/"]this[/URL], and [URL="http://www.mersenne.info/trial_factored_tabular_delta_7/2/50000000/"]this[/URL] and [URL="http://www.mersenne.info/exponent_status_tabular_delta_7/2/50000000/"]this[/URL].

But, if you (or anyone) wants to do your own thing, go to it....

[QUOTE=chalsall;287944]
Compare [URL="http://www.mersenne.info/trial_factored_tabular_delta_7/2/40000000/"]this[/URL] and [URL="http://www.mersenne.info/exponent_status_tabular_delta_7/2/40000000/"]this[/URL], and [URL="http://http://www.mersenne.info/trial_factored_tabular_delta_7/2/50000000/"]this[/URL] and [URL="http://www.mersenne.info/exponent_status_tabular_delta_7/2/50000000/"]this[/URL].
[/QUOTE]

Third link is broken

Edit(by CH): Thanks. Fixed.

Not broken, just inserted two times by mistake. Cut it in half and it will work :smile:

[QUOTE=chalsall;287944]You continue to fail to understand.[/QUOTE]

Me too. I can't second your definition of GPUto72's effectiveness. Compare the number of exponents [I]factored [/I]with the number of (successful) LL tests run.

For the last month that gives 207+671=878 vs. 57+952+13+4495=5517 (for LLTF, i.e. 40M-60M). Under the (somewhat faulty) assumption that every factor saves 2 LL tests in this range, we would have had to factor like 3x as many candidates to keep up.

The numbers are of course even (much much) worse for DCTF: 185 candidates factored vs. 4103 that should have been. (So, do more DCTF, everyone! :big grin:)

[QUOTE=ckdo;287960]Me too. I can't second your definition of GPUto72's effectiveness. Compare the number of exponents [I]factored [/I]with the number of (successful) LL tests run.
[/QUOTE]

If you're going to do that, you must compare the number of exponents factored, with the number of LLs [I]GPUto72 team[/I] could have cleared by LL. Not whole of GIMPS. This is, after all, not a [B]competition[/B] between GPUto72 and GIMPS -- they're complementary efforts.

The point of GPUto72 was to factor LL's to 72 bits (way over the default primenet limit of 68(?) bits) and release the survivors to the rest of GIMPS for LL-ing. The whole thing was meant to tactically focus GPUs (whose strong suit is TF), to advance the GIMPS LL-wave. But for that to effectively happen, GPUto72 must be able to "keep up" with the LL-wave. Earlier in the project, it didn't have the firepower to do so; now it does.

[QUOTE=axn;287962]If you're going to do that, you must compare the number of exponents factored, with the number of LLs [I]GPUto72 team[/I] could have cleared by LL. Not whole of GIMPS. This is, after all, not a [B]competition[/B] between GPUto72 and GIMPS -- they're complementary efforts.[/QUOTE]

Exactly!!!

[QUOTE=axn;287962]The point of GPUto72 was to factor LL's to 72 bits (way over the default primenet limit of 68(?) bits) and release the survivors to the rest of GIMPS for LL-ing. The whole thing was meant to tactically focus GPUs (whose strong suit is TF), to advance the GIMPS LL-wave. But for that to effectively happen, GPUto72 must be able to "keep up" with the LL-wave. Earlier in the project, it didn't have the firepower to do so; now it does.[/QUOTE]

Indeed. And we are contining to gain firepower every week.

Additionally, as the exponents get larger, the trial factoring cost (for a particular bit level) decreases while the LL cost increases.

Lastly, my thinking had to do with the fact we're now completing more than twice as many candidates than are being LLed. This is the magic "cross-over" point where we start pulling ahead in the "wave" (because approximately half of all LL assignments are never completed).

To be clear, "Spidy" is not going to get aggressive with it's reservations. However, when it finds a candidate only TFed to 70 or below above 55M, it will keep it until it's taken to 72.

@[i]chalsall[/i]: could you create a wiki entry for [url=http://www.gpu72.com]GPU to 72[/url]? Something along the lines of [url=http://mersennewiki.org/index.php/Mersenne-aries.sili.net]my site's entry[/url] that briefly describes what it is and what it does.

[QUOTE=James Heinrich;287979]@[i]chalsall[/i]: could you create a wiki entry for [url=http://www.gpu72.com]GPU to 72[/url]? Something along the lines of [url=http://mersennewiki.org/index.php/Mersenne-aries.sili.net]my site's entry[/url] that briefly describes what it is and what it does.[/QUOTE]

Sure. Good idea. Thanks.

[url]http://gpu72.com/reports/workers/ll/graph/3-12/[/url]

Heehee, that's rather funny looking :smile:

[QUOTE=Dubslow;287986]Heehee, that's rather funny looking :smile:[/QUOTE]

But accurate.

Consider it modern art.... :wink: