[QUOTE=Prime95;405165]There is no need to re-run the P-1. Prime95 did not report the bounds when a factor (1 or any other) was found. The bounds in the database are for legitimate P-1 runs after the failed run.[/QUOTE]

Good to know. I just ran the smallest exponent out of the bunch (M3927601) up to B1=1000000 / B2=27079710 and got nothing (took about 15 minutes). I didn't think it was worth going further.

TJAOI finished submitting 58-bit prime factors and he started to submit 59-bit prime factors of Mersenne numbers.

Nice ~120 bit ecm factor found by TJAOI today: 487310330235404567665526421890438249

True. A prime one. Interesting that such a large factor was found using B1=50000... how come? (No conspiracy theories here :smile:, just wondering).

[QUOTE=LaurV;410202]Nice ~120 bit ecm factor found by TJAOI today: 487310330235404567665526421890438249[/QUOTE]

What he should do now is submit a bunch of "no factor found by TF" all the way up to 2^120.

I mean, right? That's how it works? :smile:

From TJAOI's numbers at [url]http://www.mersenne.org/report_top_500_tf/[/url] it is clear that he only wants to submit factors to the database. He has almost no GHz - days for no factors found.

[QUOTE=alpertron;410242]he only wants to submit factors to the database. He has almost no GHz - days for no factors found.[/QUOTE]
We know that. Madpoo just made a (good) joke, related to the discussion in a parallel thread, where a user found factors by P-1 (not by TF!) and sent "no factors" for lower bitlevels, which is wrong, as P-1 does not find the smallest factor, but the "smoothest" one.
For the second part, he may come with GHzDays when he gets over 2^61, right now he [U]can not[/U], even if he would wish to, because of the "result not needed" when you try to report factors of 2^59 (or whatever limit he is crunching now).

[QUOTE=lycorn;410208]True. A prime one. Interesting that such a large factor was found using B1=50000... how come? (No conspiracy theories here :smile:, just wondering).[/QUOTE]
It is ECM factor, not P-1. Some q-k can be B1-smooth for very low B1 (as opposite to P-1 where q-1 must be smooth, with ECM it can be k[TEX]\neq[/TEX]1)

After submitting several thousands of 59-bit prime factors of Mersenne numbers a day, finally TJAOI finished today with this task. On Monday he will start submitting 60-bit prime factors.}

The latest prime factor submitted is the second known prime factor of [URL="http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=581856523&full=1"]M581856523[/URL], which has 58.99999852... bits

TJAOI just posted a number of first factors between 61-62 bits.

It seems that most of these numbers were not factored below ~2^65 as opposed to an error prone user.

[QUOTE=flagrantflowers;415800]TJAOI just posted a number of first factors between 61-62 bits.

It seems that most of these numbers were not factored below ~2^65 as opposed to an error prone user.[/QUOTE]

Which brings us back to the earlier discussion on another thread, when you look up a detailed report for an exponent and it says factored to whatever, say 61-63 and 66-67 how do we know the 63-66 was actually done?