[QUOTE=Madpoo;417574]@kladner: Good job, your run was okay after all:
[URL="http://www.mersenne.org/report_exponent/?exp_lo=57798707&full=1"]M57798707[/URL][/QUOTE]

Well that is encouraging. Maybe this MSI 580 actually can run CuLu with stock memory speed. None of my other cards ever managed that.

Thanks, Aaron!

Here's a set of 8 from the same CPU/year/app.

Some recent mismatches (you're welcome) bumped this CPU from just 1 bad and zero good up to 3 bad, still zero good. This came from my little project of taking machines with just 1 bad, zero good and testing another couple from them to see which way they trend. :smile: Well, I start with just one more... if it's good I might move on for now unless something makes me think I should do more (a number of suspect results, or other mismatches where I couldn't readily declare a winner). If it's bad I'll take another one and see how it does.

8 more solo-checked exponents, and unless these first 3 were flukes, I'd expect to see more bad results from their list.

[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
46842001 3 0 8 1 8 1 DoubleCheck=46842001,72,1
47213381 3 0 8 1 8 1 DoubleCheck=47213381,72,1
48194567 3 0 8 1 8 1 DoubleCheck=48194567,72,1
48573319 3 0 8 1 8 1 DoubleCheck=48573319,72,1
48665891 3 0 8 1 8 1 DoubleCheck=48665891,72,1
49458037 3 0 8 1 8 1 DoubleCheck=49458037,72,1
50347757 3 0 8 1 8 1 DoubleCheck=50347757,73,1
50437999 3 0 8 1 8 1 DoubleCheck=50437999,73,1[/CODE]

46842001 is mine

[QUOTE=Mark Rose;417742]46842001 is mine[/QUOTE]

I took the rest.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;417532]Here's a batch... we're out of 3:1 bad-to-good, so these are 2:1 but only when they *also* have a bunch of mismatches as well (at least 3). It's a good bet those other mismatches they have will wind up being bad once they get triple-checked.

[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
...
53749079 2 1 67 2 66 3 DoubleCheck=53749079,73,1
53753839 2 1 67 2 66 3 DoubleCheck=53753839,73,1
...[/CODE][/QUOTE]

I'm taking the above two. I'm curious to see how this CPU's results shake out, from the 66 solo-checked stuff it has. Could go either way, I guess. I'm going to bump them to the top of the list on a system just to see where we're at early on.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;417798]I'm taking the above two. [/QUOTE]
I grabbed the next six, 53775277 through 54386317 inclusive.

Oh, here are some, including a few juicy ones that just became available.

[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
38292193 8 0 3 0 2 1 DoubleCheck=38292193,71,1
40337237 3 1 4 0 3 1 DoubleCheck=40337237,72,1
40341421 3 0 4 1 3 2 DoubleCheck=40341421,72,1
40359299 12 0 2 2 2 2 DoubleCheck=40359299,72,1
40360597 3 1 4 0 3 1 DoubleCheck=40360597,72,1[/CODE]

[QUOTE=Madpoo;417798]I'm taking the above two. I'm curious to see how this CPU's results shake out, from the 66 solo-checked stuff it has. Could go either way, I guess. I'm going to bump them to the top of the list on a system just to see where we're at early on.[/QUOTE]

Both of those came back with a match, and it was only then that I realized who the user in question was... sorry George! :smile:

[QUOTE=Madpoo;417974]Both of those came back with a match, and it was only then that I realized who the user in question was... sorry George! :smile:[/QUOTE]

My systems are not as stable as most. Last Summer a Haswell system went bad. It would make sense to do early double-checks on the exponents it tested for at least a month or two before the first bad result was reported.

[QUOTE=Madpoo;417973]Oh, here are some, including a few juicy ones that just became available.

[CODE]exponent Bad Good Unk Sus Solo Mis worktodo
38292193 8 0 3 0 2 1 DoubleCheck=38292193,71,1
40337237 3 1 4 0 3 1 DoubleCheck=40337237,72,1
40341421 3 0 4 1 3 2 DoubleCheck=40341421,72,1
40359299 12 0 2 2 2 2 DoubleCheck=40359299,72,1
40360597 3 1 4 0 3 1 DoubleCheck=40360597,72,1[/CODE][/QUOTE]

mine.

[QUOTE=Prime95;417987]My systems are not as stable as most. Last Summer a Haswell system went bad. It would make sense to do early double-checks on the exponents it tested for at least a month or two before the first bad result was reported.[/QUOTE]

Well, I guess we'll see as we do more of them from that system.

That system did have 2 suspect results that were already DC'd and mismatched. Another result was a mismatch where the other result was suspect... I guess both could have been bad... we'll see. I picked up all 3 to do the triple-check. Should have all of those done in a day or two.

My gut tells me 2 of the 3 will turn out to be bad, and that 3rd one, I'm just not sure, could go either way. :smile: We'll probably wind up with a tie, 4 bad, 4 good (currently it's 2 bad, 3 good, 2 suspect, 1 other mismatch, and 64 solo checks to go).

The current known results break down:
Jan 3 = suspect
May 11 = 3 good in one day
May 11 = non-suspect, but mismatched first result
June 3 = bad
June 6 = suspect
June 16 = bad

So, it's kind of spread out... After June 16th of 2014 that system got upgraded to a newer Prime95 and it was doing MUCH better (it was also doing more double-checks instead of first time checks, so there's more track record for it).

All the more reason why a suspected bad system should only be doing double-checks until we're sure it's running okay, but I don't really know how that would work in practice.