[QUOTE=gd_barnes;240249]Will you be testing S19 any further? I didn't get a reservation range from you when you reserved it.[/QUOTE]
Of course I will - except, there is anyone else, who wants this base. So far, I sieved n1K-100K. I don't like to switch the base too often, so I'll just concentrate on my both reservations.

[QUOTE=gd_barnes;240249]Also, can you send me the results (residues) for n=25K-50K?[/QUOTE] On the way.
[QUOTE=gd_barnes;240249]Thanks for the large amount of work on this! :-)[/QUOTE] No prob. And thank you for coordinating this project(s) :smile:


[QUOTE=gd_barnes]Gary[/QUOTE]Xentar

Base=10 (Sierpinski + Riesel) tested till n=600000

Reservation
 

From the recommended list:

Reserving R26 400K-500K

s17 is almost done till 1M. No prime :no:
Will do some rechecks and then send you the residues.

After this, I will start sieving n=1M - 1.5M

[QUOTE=Xentar;249028]s17 is almost done till 1M. No prime :no:
Will do some rechecks and then send you the residues.

After this, I will start sieving n=1M - 1.5M[/QUOTE]
Holy cow! :shock: That's a lot of work--nice! Just curious, how many cores do you have on it?

(And I was thinking about taking S9 from 800K-1M in the near future when I can add another quad to my arsenal...guess that won't be a record after all. :wink:)

[QUOTE=mdettweiler;249034]Holy cow! :shock: That's a lot of work--nice! Just curious, how many cores do you have on it?[/QUOTE]
Not so much. At the moment: 6 cores from my new main machine (Intel 980X :cool:), and a few other machines with 6-8 cores together.

[QUOTE=mdettweiler;249034](And I was thinking about taking S9 from 800K-1M in the near future when I can add another quad to my arsenal...guess that won't be a record after all. :wink:)[/QUOTE]
Good luck :smile:

By the way: Without PRPNet I couldn't do this. Thank you Mark.

[QUOTE=Xentar;249037]Not so much. At the moment: 6 cores from my new main machine (Intel 980X :cool:), and a few other machines with 6-8 cores together.[/QUOTE]
LOL--you call that "not so much"? :wink: That's more than my total resources (2 quads + 1 dualcore) combined! (We'll be about even when I add my upcoming additional quad, though.) Though I suppose you're right, it's not too much compared to someone like Gary, who has 12 quads.

[QUOTE=mdettweiler;249075]... (We'll be about even when I add my upcoming additional quad, though.)...[/QUOTE]
What are you getting Max? :smile:

Max,

Don't forget one thing: The effort to take S17 from n=800K-1M is only slightly bigger than the effort to take S9 from n=800K-1M. That's because although the test sizes for S17 are approximately 29% bigger [i.e. log(17)/log(9)=~1.29], S9 is ~50% higher weight. If you square ~1.29, you get ~1.66 so the tests should take about 66% longer for S17 but that is largely made up for by the 50% additional tests that must be done for S9.

(Actually the 66% longer is probably not quite right because the k-value for S17 is much smaller. Likely it's more like 55-60% longer for each test making the difference in testing time for the same n-range quite close.)

S17 is very low weight and has helped Xentar reach n=1M much more quickly than its 1k-remaining neighbors. S12, for example, is 3 times the weight of S17 and will take far longer than either S9 or S17 to reach n=1M.

All of this said, reaching n=1M on any base (other than base 2) is a great accomplishment. Nice work Xentar! :-)


Gary

[QUOTE=Flatlander;249078]What are you getting Max? :smile:[/QUOTE]
It will be a laptop; I'm hoping to purchase it sometime before April or so. I'm aiming for something with a quad-core processor in it; given the price range I'm going for ($650-$700 USD) that will probably mean an AMD Athlon II X4 rather than an i7 (which is more like $800-$1000 for a laptop; laptop i5's are dualcores so they're out of the question here). Still, Athlon II's aren't bad--they're only a wee bit slower per-core than i7's. And since Athlon II's are cheaper, I should be able to get a higher clock speed than a comparable i7, thus evening the speed gap.

Once I've purchased the laptop, I'll have a total of three quads (the first two being my Q6600, plus one of Gary's Phenom X4's that he "gave" me at the beginning of the year--I'm running it remotely) plus a dualcore, which will be a good amount of resources with which to tackle S9. Based on some rough calculations I did, I should be able to get it to 1M with those resources in about 2-2.5 months.
[QUOTE=gd_barnes;249091]Max,

Don't forget one thing: The effort to take S17 from n=800K-1M is only slightly bigger than the effort to take S9 from n=800K-1M. That's because although the test sizes for S17 are approximately 29% bigger [i.e. log(17)/log(9)=~1.29], S9 is ~50% higher weight. If you square ~1.29, you get ~1.66 so the tests should take about 66% longer for S17 but that is largely made up for by the 50% additional tests that must be done for S9.

(Actually the 66% longer is probably not quite right because the k-value for S17 is much smaller. Likely it's more like 55-60% longer for each test making the difference in testing time for the same n-range quite close.)

S17 is very low weight and has helped Xentar reach n=1M much more quickly than its 1k-remaining neighbors. S12, for example, is 3 times the weight of S17 and will take far longer than either S9 or S17 to reach n=1M.

All of this said, reaching n=1M on any base (other than base 2) is a great accomplishment. Nice work Xentar! :-)


Gary[/QUOTE]
Interesting. I didn't realize S17 was so low-weight, especially considering that S9 in and of itself is amazingly low-weight. I'd hate to think of how high S17 will likely need to go to get that last prime!

status report
 

Base=10 (Sierpinski + Riesel) tested till n=610000