mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search > PrimeNet > GPU to 72

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2014-01-11, 12:49   #2630
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
Jun 2011
Thailand

7·1,373 Posts
Default

Hey Chris, I have some issues with you!

First, there is no 37M available from GPU72 for DC, as we discussed before. I had to take a couple of them directly from PrimeNet to give some work to do to my card. Remember, some FFT with power of 2 which works for 37M expos is about 30% more efficient on GCN cards (which we discussed in the clLucas' thread). Now I switched that card to DCTF so you don't need to take any action, jut let you know. The 37M expos reserved for DC magically disappeared from gpu72 assignemnt page.

Second, last of the exponents from the batch was a mismatch, 37000291, so I did a TC to his majesty and turned out my DC was good and original residue was bad (unless there is a bug in clLucas, because both DC and TC were done with the same software, on the same card, and they matched - edit: I am still keeping the residues till problem solved). So, if someone else is reserving this expo for GPU work, they will work in vain. Therfore I am thinking that the exponent is a very good candidate for your R7 systems, if any of them is free...

Before someone else grabs it...

Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2014-01-11 at 12:53
LaurV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-01-11, 13:04   #2631
flashjh
 
flashjh's Avatar
 
"Jerry"
Nov 2011
Vancouver, WA

100011000112 Posts
Default

If it's ok, I grabbed it to test a newer system I have...
flashjh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-01-11, 16:38   #2632
kracker
 
kracker's Avatar
 
"Mr. Meeseeks"
Jan 2012
California, USA

23·271 Posts
Default

If it please your majesty... a few 38M exponents as well?

Last fiddled with by kracker on 2014-01-11 at 16:38
kracker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-01-11, 21:10   #2633
chalsall
If I May
 
chalsall's Avatar
 
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados

2·5·7·139 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kracker View Post
If it please your majesty... a few 38M exponents as well?
Please don't even make that joke (and I understand and appreciate that it was a joke).

If anything, I am your servant. You are not a subject...

Let me see what I can do....
chalsall is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-01-13, 21:22   #2634
flashjh
 
flashjh's Avatar
 
"Jerry"
Nov 2011
Vancouver, WA

1,123 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LaurV View Post
Second, last of the exponents from the batch was a mismatch, 37000291...
Done

Last fiddled with by flashjh on 2014-01-13 at 21:22
flashjh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-01-18, 18:28   #2635
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
Jun 2011
Thailand

7×1,373 Posts
Default

We switched few of our cores to assignments directly from PrimeNet until GPU72 decides to give us the assignment types we requested, i.e. DC, and not P-1, see a former discussion about a rebel core which didn't want to get the right type of assignments from gpu72, now the plague spreaded to other cores too, therefore we killed the proxy and hung its groins on the gate... for everybody to see that we killed it. We are going to finish the (wrong type of) assignments we got, but we will not request other through the Gpu72 proxy for a while, from those cores.

Just to let you know.

OTOH, we are doing now TF to 71 for all (30-33M) exponents we got for DC. We can do 53 of those things in the same time we do one DC, so if we find a factor, this DC is cleared (and deleted from our list) and we save/gain some time. We already found a factor for 31388729, (nice one, starts with 1234...., unreported yet, it will be reported automatically when its time come by the batch, in aout one hour). This credit also does not go to Gpu72 (i.e. will not be seen on those nice graphics, but it can be seen on Gimps), as we didn't get the TF assignments from there. Sorry. We can't do better for now, till the problem is solved.

Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2014-01-18 at 18:53
LaurV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-01-18, 20:27   #2636
garo
 
garo's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Termonfeckin, IE

22×691 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LaurV View Post
OTOH, we are doing now TF to 71 for all (30-33M) exponents we got for DC. We can do 53 of those things in the same time we do one DC, so if we find a factor, this DC is cleared (and deleted from our list) and we save/gain some time.
This does not make sense if all those 30-33M are already TFed to 70 bits. Assuming you are using the same hardware, by doing TF to 71 you clear 53/71 exponents in the same time you do a DC. So how exactly are you saving/gaining time?
garo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-01-18, 21:18   #2637
chalsall
If I May
 
chalsall's Avatar
 
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados

2×5×7×139 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by garo View Post
This does not make sense if all those 30-33M are already TFed to 70 bits.
Every DC candidate below 33M is already TFed to at least 70 "bits". Every available DC candidate in the 33M range is TFed to at least 71 bits.
chalsall is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-01-19, 04:16   #2638
LaurV
Romulan Interpreter
 
LaurV's Avatar
 
Jun 2011
Thailand

7·1,373 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by garo View Post
This does not make sense if all those 30-33M are already TFed to 70 bits. Assuming you are using the same hardware, by doing TF to 71 you clear 53/71 exponents in the same time you do a DC. So how exactly are you saving/gaining time?
Well, it depends on your luck :D. In fact your chances are lower, considering that some P-1 was also done on the range (like 53 in about 90, and not 71). But I am a lucky guy, see below.

You do not "clear" 53 exponents in this time. You try to clear them, that is why is called trial factoring. You may be lucky and find factors faster then it would take you to do a complete DC, therefore "clearing" those exponents for which you found factors. You also might be unlucky, and find no factor, in this case the DC LL tests still will have to run for all of them, so you wasted the time spent to do TF.

You may also stop immediately after you found a factor, therefore the rest of the time is "saved".

Now put into the equation the number of TF you can run in the same time you could do a DC (yes, on the same GPU hardware, don't count the CPU), and the probability to find a factor for exponents you got, and you will have a system which you can solve and see how much TF you need to do, to "gain". Factor your luck inside

Concrete: I found 2 factors (the one mentioned before, and 31420847 factored few minutes after) in 6 hours, going through the 27 exponents I had assigned last night (with a single gtx580, it takes 23 minutes and 19 seconds to do a 31M from 70 to 71). To do two full DC tests on the same card it would take 50 hours. So, I "gained/saved" 44 hours of work to clean those 2 exponents.

Of course, it is like trading Forex, you are not always so lucky, but probabilistically I am on plus side, that is why I am still doing it.

What was your question, again?

Last fiddled with by LaurV on 2014-01-19 at 04:17
LaurV is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-01-26, 09:34   #2639
garo
 
garo's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Termonfeckin, IE

ACC16 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LaurV View Post
Well, it depends on your luck :D. In fact your chances are lower, considering that some P-1 was also done on the range (like 53 in about 90, and not 71). But I am a lucky guy, see below.
<snip>

Of course, it is like trading Forex, you are not always so lucky, but probabilistically I am on plus side, that is why I am still doing it.

What was your question, again?
Right! Let us work against probability on a maths project. Nice one.
garo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-01-26, 14:52   #2640
c10ck3r
 
c10ck3r's Avatar
 
Aug 2010
Kansas

547 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LaurV View Post

You also might be unlucky, and find no factor, in this case the DC LL tests still will have to run for all of them, so you wasted the time spent to do TF.
Wasted? Not necessarily. You've just doubled the depth the exponents have been TF'd to, which (if there is ever a reason or desire to prove one or more factors for these exponents) gives a higher ground to search from. Plus, it allows the GPU to do what it is best at (TF) instead of work that is better fitted for CPUs.
c10ck3r is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Status Primeinator Operation Billion Digits 5 2011-12-06 02:35
62 bit status 1997rj7 Lone Mersenne Hunters 27 2008-09-29 13:52
OBD Status Uncwilly Operation Billion Digits 22 2005-10-25 14:05
1-2M LLR status paulunderwood 3*2^n-1 Search 2 2005-03-13 17:03
Status of 26.0M - 26.5M 1997rj7 Lone Mersenne Hunters 25 2004-06-18 16:46

All times are UTC. The time now is 22:27.


Fri Jul 16 22:27:37 UTC 2021 up 49 days, 20:14, 1 user, load averages: 1.59, 2.25, 2.62

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.