That 3D graph is pretty cool, what did you use to generate that?

Excel There is full rotation available.

I am having trouble right now getting it to do something that I [B]know[/B] that it should, ignoring blank entries. I was going to try and graph OBD's status, using the full data set. 2 lines on the same x-axis, the first being current expos, the second, the bit depth of the factored expos.

All of the following have been taken to 75 bits now with no factors.

byroz:

3321929197
3321929209
3321929621
3321929701
3321929987
3321930173
3321930211

me:

3321932093
3321932111
3321932123
3321932143
3321932161
3321932359
3321932443
3321932491

We are still continuing with the rest of the candidates.

OK, now returning these candidates, plus a factor!

byroz:

3321930229
3321930323
3321931057
3321931061 <-- factored

me:

3321932567
3321932767
3321932869
3321932899
3321932909

3321933179

And now for the most interesting part, 2^3321931061 - 1 has a factor 29833158347165530570273

Or to put it another way, 2 * 4490333754576 * 3321931061 + 1

My handy dandy [url=http://2721.hddkillers.com/compare/live/]compare-o-matic[/url] tells me that 3321928373 is reported as being at 75 bits on MoreGIMPS, but it isn't yet. It's only 2/3 the way to 75 bits, I expect it to get there late on the 24th or early on the 25th.

[QUOTE=lavalamp;178076]OK, now returning these candidates, plus a factor!
2^3321931061 - 1 has a factor 29833158347165530570273
[/QUOTE]

Congratulations to byroz on the factor! :wblipp:

Did trial factoring complete the 75 bit level?

William

Yep, all the way to 75. And we've each finished another since then, no more factors though.

3321931163

3321932969

[QUOTE=lavalamp;178076]OK, now returning these candidates, plus a factor!

byroz:

3321930229
3321930323
3321931057
3321931061 <-- factored

me:

3321932567
3321932767
3321932869
3321932899
3321932909

3321933179

And now for the most interesting part, 2^3321931061 - 1 has a factor 29833158347165530570273

Or to put it another way, 2 * 4490333754576 * 3321931061 + 1

My handy dandy [url=http://2721.hddkillers.com/compare/live/]compare-o-matic[/url] tells me that 3321928373 is reported as being at 75 bits on MoreGIMPS, but it isn't yet. It's only 2/3 the way to 75 bits, I expect it to get there late on the 24th or early on the 25th.[/QUOTE]

Nice work!

There is a small glitch on the database, Byroz appears as having found the factor twice. I will correct it as soon as I get home,a s I have no access to the server from where I am now.

Luigi

OK, so all of these are done to 75 bits now:

3321932969
3321933007
3321933047
3321933089
3321933113
3321933179
3321933193
3321933253
3321933289
3321933313

3321928373 and 3321933233 are NOT done just yet, but very nearly. I think I'll take 3321928373 on to 76 bits on the Willamette.

Here are byroz's's's latest completed to 75 bits:

3321931163
3321931243
3321931289
3321931363

I'd also like to reserve the following candidates to 75 bits:

3321928483
3321928601
3321928697
3321928699
3321928777
3321928927
3321928963
3321928999
3321929041
3321929053
3321929059
3321929113

[QUOTE=ET_;178122]Nice work!

There is a small glitch on the database, Byroz appears as having found the factor twice. I will correct it as soon as I get home,a s I have no access to the server from where I am now.

Luigi[/QUOTE]

The database has been updated, and the errors on the stats pages have been corrected. The download page now has Linux 64 bits executables optimized for Core2 and AMD, compiled under MPIR and GMP 4.3.0 by Jeff, with respectively 1.21 and 1.42 speedups over older versions.

I hope I will have more news after the weekend (note that June 29th is holiday in Rome).

Luigi

[QUOTE=ET_;178827]The download page now has Linux 64 bits executables optimized for Core2 and AMD, compiled under MPIR and GMP 4.3.0 by Jeff, with respectively 1.21 and 1.42 speedups over older versions.
[/QUOTE]

Just a clarification, they are compiled with MPIR 1.2.1, not GMP.

Jeff.

There seems to be a typo on the webpage:

[CODE]Level 11 Eleven Candidates to 77 bits
28 May 2009
Level 10 Ten Candidates to 76 bits
16 May 2009
Level 9 Nine Candidates to 75 bits
3 Dec 2007[/CODE]

That seems unlikely.