No comprenti moi.
 

[QUOTE=Dubslow;295306]As a matter of fact, chalsall has a table of the 100 largest factors for GPU272, which means the data is limited to our specific exponent range. I rank very low on the list, despite a sizeable number of total factors.[/QUOTE]
[url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8NJ8T0T4uI&feature=endscreen&NR=1]Our hardware size is irrelevant[/url].
My Core2 runs quietly and coolly at 2 GHz 24/7, and surprizing
as it may seem to our mutual friend Bob, manages 2 GHzdays/day.
(Video excluded)
As such, I could claim to speak for the majority of
GIMPS participnts.
"Our exponent range" is 2^(~25).

I share iin the enthusiasm Chris has brought to George's
great project, but note that you GPUto72 guys are a tiny
and atypical fraction of all participants.
I would describe myself as an even less representative example:smile:

David

A few days ago:

[CODE]
expected found
DCTF 230.34 259
LLTF 271.019 269
[/CODE]

As I type this:

[CODE]
expected found
DCTF 230.34 259
LLTF 273.885 275
[/CODE]

I must be skewing the DCTF figures (+12.4% ish). Unless someone tells me that deviation is to be expected. Or there's a bunch of people having some hardware issues doing DCTF.

The few percentage points deviation on LLTF I guess is to be expected.

BTW I've changed my allocation policy to pick older exponents. I thought clearing out the old ones might be the way to go.

-- Craig

[QUOTE=nucleon;295447]I must be skewing the DCTF figures (+12.4% ish). Unless someone tells me that deviation is to be expected. Or there's a bunch of people having some hardware issues doing DCTF.[/QUOTE]

I think it's a couple of things...

First of all, you're definitely "luckier" than some others in the DC range.

However, another influence is possibly because I'm currently using the same WLR for both ranges. This is probably not the ideal "fit" (although across our full sample set it works out to be better than 99% accurate) because all the DCs have had P-1 done, while less than half of LLs have had P-1 previously attempted.

This weekend I'll look into using seperate WTF slopes and intercepts for the two range classes, and see if I can make the predictions even more accurate.

[QUOTE=nucleon;295447]BTW I've changed my allocation policy to pick older exponents. I thought clearing out the old ones might be the way to go.[/QUOTE]

Excellent. Thank you.

And as some might have noticed, we're now effectively out of all work except 71 -> 72.

[QUOTE=chalsall;295455]I think it's a couple of things...

First of all, you're definitely "luckier" than some others in the DC range.

Excellent. Thank you.

And as some might have noticed, we're now effectively out of all work except 71 -> 72.[/QUOTE]

I count myself as "luckier" than some others, too, in the DC range. I have been picking up some 71-72 assignments, but I have stopped taking assignments for now. I am going to be away starting 04/08/2012 for a few days. I don't really like to leave the box running unattended, so it will be shut down. I have been letting my assignments wind down. I did extend my newer LL/DC assignments, just in case.

[QUOTE=chalsall;295455]
This weekend I'll look into using seperate WTF slopes and intercepts for the two range classes[/QUOTE]
...what the flux?

[QUOTE=chalsall;295455]This weekend I'll look into using seperate WTF slopes and intercepts for the two range classes[/QUOTE]

Wednesday, Thursday, Friday

[QUOTE=petrw1;295458]Wednesday, Thursday, Friday[/QUOTE]
So Happy It's Thursday!:poop:

[QUOTE=petrw1;295458]Wednesday, Thursday, Friday[/QUOTE]

LOL... I figured everyone would know what WTF mean: [COLOR="White"]Wrote Too Fast...[/COLOR]

I meant, of course, WLR.

Couple of things: First, the scale labeling for the P-1 graph [URL="http://gpu72.com/reports/overall/graph/"]here[/URL] is messed up. It goes null,0,1,1,2, where " " is the y value of the x-axis.

Secondly, why are there only ~370 P-1 candidates? There isn't an unusual amount reserved; is it just (an odd) coincidence?

[QUOTE=Dubslow;295510]Couple of things: First, the scale labeling for the P-1 graph [URL="http://gpu72.com/reports/overall/graph/"]here[/URL] is messed up. It goes null,0,1,1,2, where " " is the y value of the x-axis.[/QUOTE]

Whoops. Thanks.

I made some adjustments to the graphs so they would line up better. Unfortunately when I looked at the weekly graphs P-1 had a large block of results which made the labels sane. Not so today. Fixed.

[QUOTE=Dubslow;295510]Secondly, why are there only ~370 P-1 candidates? There isn't an unusual amount reserved; is it just (an odd) coincidence?[/QUOTE]

No. We've got a large batch of TF results without P-1 expected to complete shortly, so I threw 600 back to PrimeNet to hand out as it feels is appropriate.

Chalsall,

Can you check your get LL TF form?

I selected oldest exponent and it allocated based on lowest TF level. I can't rule out user error. I went back button in browser and it showed oldest.

-- Craig