[QUOTE=chalsall;288771]But if you take a look at the [URL="http://www.gpu72.com/reports/overall/"]overall system stats[/URL], you'll see that LLTF finds more factors / candidate than DCTF.[/QUOTE]

Statin' the bleedin' obvious, aren't we? LLTF candidates get like 3.5 bit levels of TF on average while DCTF candidates get only 1.1 bit levels on average. I'm not exactly surprised. :no:

[QUOTE=ckdo;288790]Statin' the bleedin' obvious, aren't we? LLTF candidates get like 3.5 bit levels of TF on average while DCTF candidates get only 1.1 bit levels on average. I'm not exactly surprised. :no:[/QUOTE]

But that's because the DCTF candidates have already been taken above where they nominally are. See [URL="http://mersenne.org/various/math.php"]Mersenne.org's Math page[/URL].

G72 is cooridinating taking all candidates to be 4 bit levels above what was nominal before GPUs entered the equation.

And, again, the project is currently well ahead of the DC wave front, while still working [B][I][U]within[/U][/I][/B] the LL wave.

[QUOTE=KyleAskine;288786]If TF starts outpacing P-1 and LL, are there any thoughts to lowering the exponent limit for TF to 73?[/QUOTE]

Could you please restate your question, because as is it doesn't make sense (at least to me).

We are currently only taking candidates to 72 bits, except those above 58.52M.

[QUOTE=KyleAskine;288786]How are we doing compared to the LL wave?[/QUOTE]

We are currently pulling ahead in the "wave", but are still working within it.

[QUOTE=chalsall;288793]Could you please restate your question, because as is it doesn't make sense (at least to me).

We are currently only taken candidates to 72 bits, except those above 58.52M.
[/QUOTE]

When I say 'lowering the exponent limit' I mean, are there thoughts of taking exponents smaller than 58.52M to 73 instead of 72, assuming we are beating LL and P-1.

[QUOTE=chalsall;288793]Could you please restate your question, because as is it doesn't make sense (at least to me).[/QUOTE]

I'm stupid... I now understand your language.

While lowering the boundry to TF LL candidates to 73 to be below the current 58.52M limit is at least three months off, this might be considered now for DC candidates. As in, lowering the limit to take DC TF candidates to 70 to be below 29.69M.

Thoughts DCTF'ers?

[QUOTE=KyleAskine;288794]When I say 'lowering the exponent limit' I mean, are there thoughts of taking exponents smaller than 58.52M to 73 instead of 72, assuming we are beating LL and P-1.[/QUOTE]

We cross-posted...

At this point in time, while we are now pulling ahead in the LL "wave", we don't have enough firepower to take that step (yet).

Spidy is still finding, and throwing back, candidates only TFed to 71 above 55M at the moment.

Can we activate html in posts?
 

[QUOTE=Spidy;http://gpu72.com/reports/overall/]


Assigned:[indent][indent][indent] TF[/indent][/indent][/indent]Double Check: 12,679
Lucas-Lehmer: 4,442
[/QUOTE]
akjsdhf;aksdh;ckalehdckaubjsd;ka

[QUOTE=Dubslow;288813]akjsdhf;aksdh;ckalehdckaubjsd;ka[/QUOTE]

You're refering [URL="http://www.gpu72.com/reports/overall/"]to this[/URL]...

Yeah... When Giants fight, duck.... :smile:

[QUOTE=chalsall;288814]You're refering [URL="http://www.gpu72.com/reports/overall/"]to this[/URL]...

Yeah... When Giants fight, duck.... :smile:[/QUOTE]

Also, check out the factors found in the last day.


[FONT="System"][SIZE="1"]It's like when you said "Do more LL!" they heard "Do no LL!"[/SIZE][/FONT]

heheheh

Xyzzy and I have been at a battle for a while now on factors found metric. It went up a notch last night when I noticed Xyzzy submitting a lot of TF 2^69 results and his factors found metric shot up.

Also I noted people below us were churning out a fair number of factors too.

I went ballistic and sucked up a whack of DCTF work. I'm doing 69-71 DCTF with Stages=0 work.

I did leave some DCTF work.

I only have 1x GTX460 doing DCTF currently. But over the course of the next 7days or so, the rest of the farm will migrate to DCTF work.

Post the CUDA4.1 upgrade of mfaktc I was doing 1800GHzdays/day (ish). (That's 1x460GTX with DCTF, the rest LLTF). 5 GMT day average based on figures taken from [url]http://www.mersenne.org/results/[/url]

Once my whole farm is fully doing DCTF, it'll be interesting to see the GHZ-days/day output.

So this current swag of work (6000ish DCTF 69-71) should be done in about 3 weeks.

-- Craig

[QUOTE=ckdo;288790]Statin' the bleedin' obvious, aren't we? LLTF candidates get like 3.5 bit levels of TF on average while DCTF candidates get only 1.1 bit levels on average. I'm not exactly surprised. :no:[/QUOTE]
And additionally ye forget to mention that all DCTF had P-1 done, but only few of LLTF had P-1 done. For DC front the expos were already filtered, many of them were eliminated by P-1-found factors, and only the "tough" one remain into the list. That is why I said in the past there is no worth to do DCTF over 69 bits. One can find a factor every 2 days, or in the luckiest case, every day and half, but he would need only 24-26 hours to clear the exponent by doing DCLL. That is why I concentrated on LL-tests at DC front, and not DCTF.