[QUOTE=chalsall;293875]Once we have effectively cleared out the "wave", should we race ahead of it, or come back and start going to 73 below 58.52?[/QUOTE]My preference would be to "race ahead", but that's cause I enjoy finding factors. Same reason I do TF in the 800M range and P-1 in the 10M range. No doubt a vocal portion of the group will decry my work preferences as immoral in some manner, but they're free to use their own GPUs as they see fit. :smile:

[QUOTE=chalsall;293875]However, something to start discussing... Once we have effectively cleared out the "wave", should we race ahead of it, or come back and start going to 73 below 58.52?[/QUOTE]

I suspect that the answer would turn out to be "both" :smile: Build up a buffer ahead of the wave while simultaneously speeding up the wave. Maybe even prep some EFF prize candidates (~332M range)?

On a completely different topic...
 

I monitor the LMH progress and indications are that in the last few months its progress has slowed noticeably...I suspect that is a direct result of more and more people getting GPUs and working on other ranges (i.e. GPUto72), along with people getting the message that with GPUs being so much more efficient at TF that some without GPUs and moving to other work.

My 2 cents worth...
 

[QUOTE=chalsall;293875]You are.
However, something to start discussing... Once we have effectively cleared out the "wave", should we race ahead of it, or come back and start going to 73 below 58.52?

Probably we'll do what we're now doing in the DC range -- some are having fun taking higher ranges from 67 to 68, while "Pete" is taking many candidates below 29.69 to 70 rather than the nominal 69.[/QUOTE]

Take into account that I do NOT have a GPU (yet)...

Continue to help LL and DC progress...that is continue to go to higher bits in the LL wave (which I might extent to 62M) including those LL tests that get released...

And similarly in the DC wave.

[QUOTE=petrw1;293886]I monitor the LMH progress and indications are that in the last few months its progress has slowed noticeably...I suspect that is a direct result of more and more people getting GPUs and working on other ranges (i.e. GPUto72), along with people getting the message that with GPUs being so much more efficient at TF that some without GPUs and moving to other work.[/QUOTE]

The wave has slowed because it is 64 to 66 that is being done not the previous 64 to 65.

[QUOTE=chalsall;293875]
However, something to start discussing... Once we have effectively cleared out the "wave", should we race ahead of it, or come back and start going to 73 below 58.52?
[/QUOTE]
CUDALucas. While the extra TF would be nice, clearing all expos (not just the factorables) is the project's main goal. (Of course, I think people would prefer to have a nice, really stable version of CuLu that just plain works, while a few people continue with development versions.)

[QUOTE=gjmccrac;293890]The wave has slowed because it is 64 to 66 that is being done not the previous 64 to 65.[/QUOTE]

Which would take 3 times as long as 64-65 but I believe it has slowed more than that.

Based on the rate it processed the 500 and 600M range it should have taken 3 weeks to complete 800M to 65 bits
[url]http://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=288475&postcount=377[/url]
9 weeks to 66 bits.
800M started on Feb 6...9 weeks takes us to April 9th.
Currently it is processing just over 10,000 per day.
339,000 left = 33 more days = April 23.

Hmmm....maybe within the tolerance range of my guess-timates.

[QUOTE=bcp19;293876]Edit: Would it be difficult to make the site do this automatically? I normally select Lowest exponent, since there is a lowest to 70 selection, how about the program ignore the factor to box on lowest exponent and give out assignments below the cutoff to 69 and above to 70?[/QUOTE]

Done.

Now, unless you choose the "Lower Exponents to 70" option, any candidate below 29.69M will be issued with a "to 69" worktodo line even if you've "pledged" to go to 70.

Can the same be done for LLTF at 58.xx as well?

[QUOTE=axn;293881]I suspect that the answer would turn out to be "both" :smile: Build up a buffer ahead of the wave while simultaneously speeding up the wave.[/QUOTE]

Yup... I agree. Exactly like what's happening now in the DC range.

[QUOTE=axn;293881]Maybe even prep some EFF prize candidates (~332M range)?[/QUOTE]

The system could very easily facilitate that -- literlly less than half an hour of work. Anyone interested?

I would break the "Work Saved" statistics out, since a single factor found would save about 5,000 GHz Days of LL work...

[QUOTE=Dubslow;293899]Can the same be done for LLTF at 58.xx as well?[/QUOTE]

Already done, in so far as if you choose "What makes sense" and pledge to go to 73, the system will only issue work above 58.52M.

What I have done for the DCTF form will only be needed for the LLTF form once there are few available candidates below 58.52M.