View Single Post
Old 2008-05-03, 03:52   #7
gd_barnes's Avatar
May 2007
Kansas; USA

11·929 Posts

Another option might be to 'scale down' a little. I would suggest a "variable-n" approach using the range of n=250K-350K, of course skipping n=333333. There would be little or no top-5000 primes but I think the point here is to find a record twin, not find multitudes of single primes that will quickly drop off the top-5000 list. But only you guys know if finding top-5000 primes adds significant resources to the project.

By my estimate, PrimeGrid will not find an n=666666 twin or SG for 5+ years, even with a huge amount of resources.

I think you want to virtually guarantee that you'll find the largest twin when you do find one. If you choose n=500K or n=450K-524288, it's very possible that might take longer than n=666666 for PrimeGrid depending on how many more resources they have than you.

Just my two cents...

Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 2008-05-03 at 03:56
gd_barnes is offline   Reply With Quote