[QUOTE=TheMawn;382424]Yeah. I don't know why slow (laptops for example) CPUs default to TF.

There once was a debate where the conclusion was that 100.01 km/h is faster than 100.00 km/h but the wear and tear on your laptop that is resulting from crunching TF is completely not worth it.

I would recommend double-checks. If you have some RAM available, you could put one worker to P-1.[/QUOTE]

I'll switch it over to P-1 then. I don't want to run long-term tests on it until I get it a bit more stable. How do TF tests wear down the laptop?

[QUOTE=Red Raven;382434]I'll switch it over to P-1 then. I don't want to run long-term tests on it until I get it a bit more stable. How do TF tests wear down the laptop?[/QUOTE]

Doing anything that runs the CPU at 100% will cause wear and tear on fans, etc. TF is no exception (not significantly worse or better). And since a laptop will do so much less TF than a GPU, the cost/benefit ratio (for most people) tips in favor of "don't run TF". P-1 is a great idea!

[QUOTE=TheMawn;382424]Yeah. I don't know why slow (laptops for example) CPUs default to TF.[/QUOTE]

Probably because before the new assignment rules, slow machines would hold up milestones.

Personally I don't even use my Athlon II X4 640 for crunching because compared the other processors I have access to; it's just too inefficient.

[QUOTE=Mini-Geek;382438]Doing anything that runs the CPU at 100% will cause wear and tear on fans, etc. TF is no exception (not significantly worse or better). And since a laptop will do so much less TF than a GPU, the cost/benefit ratio (for most people) tips in favor of "don't run TF". P-1 is a great idea![/QUOTE]

Thanks. Given this and other info, I've taken my laptop off of GIMPS for the time being. I have to spend some time getting it stable again, after which I'll run P-1 or DC tests on it. It just wasn't worth it compared to my GPU cutting through batches of 100 TFs in a few hours and my CPU running 4 LL tests in a few weeks. Still, I know it can be of some benefit, but I want to re install Windows, clean out the fan, and downgrade the RAM to it's older, more stable 2GB kit first.

Thanks everyone, this has been very informative. I've already made a lot of progress with my GPU since you guys have helped me, and I hope to keep making contributions to the project from here on out.

I just have one more question. I'm a bit of a completionist, so how do I find out what range of numbers have been tested and double checked, and what has been done so far on other ranges? If possible, I'd like to help by starting at the lowest unchecked/un double checked numbers and filling in the gaps on the way up, regardless of what tests need to be done. I know that that won't always be the most efficient use of my hardware, but I'll only force it to run like that occasionally.

[QUOTE=Red Raven;382391]Oh, I thought 1 was the default in both, so I didn't bother. I changed it in .15pre2, so when .14 is done with the batch of 50 TFs I just gave it I'll switch back over.

I'm realizing now that this GPU is crunching TFs much faster than my 2.2Ghz single core laptop, which takes days to crunch TFs. Should it be taking days? At this point I'll probably take it off GIMPS until I reinstall Windows 7.[/QUOTE]
Thank you for using mfakto to help GIMPS. Please stick with version 0.14 for now. The XX[B]pre[/B]Y versions are pre-release test versions, sometimes for specific purposes. They typically produce correct results but are not yet fully tested. I may need to make that more obvious on the download location. 0.15pre2 is even slower than 0.14 in a few cases (I'm working on that).

[QUOTE=Bdot;382743]Thank you for using mfakto to help GIMPS. Please stick with version 0.14 for now. The XX[B]pre[/B]Y versions are pre-release test versions, sometimes for specific purposes. They typically produce correct results but are not yet fully tested. I may need to make that more obvious on the download location. 0.15pre2 is even slower than 0.14 in a few cases (I'm working on that).[/QUOTE]

Is it bad enough that you recommend I repeat the TFs that I've run so far? I don't understand why TF tests, or at least successful TFs, aren't double checked.

Successful TFs are double checked by the server on entry because the powering algorithm is so fast for a single q.

[QUOTE=Red Raven;383191]Is it bad enough that you recommend I repeat the TFs that I've run so far? I don't understand why TF tests, or at least successful TFs, aren't double checked.[/QUOTE]
There is no need to re-run any TF that was done with 0.15pre2. So far I did not find any bug in the sense of missing a factor during the test. But as mentioned, this version does not always select the optimal way to do the test.

There are no double-checks for no-factor results because of the impact of a missed factor. When mfakto fails to discover an existing factor, there is still some chance that a following P-1 test would discover the factor. If not, then two tests for primality (LL tests) will be done, proving the "no prime" result.

Therefore, missing a factor during TF primarily results in wasted electricity, but not in missed prime numbers.

Since I've had mfakto working correctly, I've run 1000 TF tests, found 18 factors, and have 1538 GHz Days (can someone explain that metric please?). I'm currently ranked 223 on the TF charts, and I'm crunching another block of 200 TFs at the moment. I haven't even been running my GPU the whole time. In fact, it's been idle for more than half the time since I've gotten mfakto running. I might consider trying to hit 10,000 TFs in a long haul before backing down to a slower rate; I want to help, but I also don't want to burn through my 280X's life span too quickly. My point is, the few minutes that you guys spent helping me out has already helped me get very far, and it's contributed what I would consider a significant amount of number crunching to the project. While I know it's a friendly competition, I very much enjoy the fact that I now own a GPU that can compete at such a level in this project. Thanks everyone!

[QUOTE=Red Raven;384445]Since I've had mfakto working correctly,

<snip>


While I know it's a friendly competition, I very much enjoy the fact that I now own a GPU that can compete at such a level in this project. Thanks everyone![/QUOTE]

It is NOT a competition. It is a team effort to reach a collective goal.
Each of us contributes what we can.

If you think that your 'ranking' matters, or your GHz days matter, then you
are participating for the wrong reason.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;384472]It is NOT a competition. It is a team effort to reach a collective goal.
Each of us contributes what we can.

If you think that your 'ranking' matters, or your GHz days matter, then you
are participating for the wrong reason.[/QUOTE]

More precisely, it is not a competition unless you want to see it as a competition, which is fine if you enjoy it as such.

I personally don't care about my or other peoples rankings. But we have those rankings and they are made available for whoever enjoys them.