View Single Post
Old 2008-12-26, 19:59   #7
gd_barnes
 
gd_barnes's Avatar
 
May 2007
Kansas; USA

22×13×197 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nuggetprime View Post
Why are we not using srsieve? For that lot of k's it should be faster.

--nugget
No. With the newer versions of sr(x)sieve, sr2sieve is definitely faster.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mdettweiler View Post
I think srsieve *used* to be faster for this many k's, but modifications introduced in recent versions of sr2sieve have in fact made sr2sieve faster. Feel free to try it for yourself and compare the p/sec. time to see which one's faster on your machine.
Yes, nugget, feel free to give both a try if you want. I think the latest version of srsieve is 0.6.10 and for sr2sieve is 1.7.15. Be sure and use these latest 64-bit versions when comparing.


Gary
gd_barnes is offline