Prime95 beta version 28.3 - Page 4

kracker · 2014-01-22, 15:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheMawn

Iteration: 20361987/32479871, POSSIBLE ERROR: ROUND OFF (0.40625) > 0.40
Continuing from last save file.
[Mon Jan 20 03:36:04 2014]
Disregard last error. Result is reproducible and thus not a hardware problem.
For added safety, redoing iteration using a slower, more reliable method.
Continuing from last save file.
[Tue Jan 21 12:30:54 2014]

Well, just make sure the last residue is correct.

TheMawn · 2014-01-22, 19:31

I've seen it once, too. Just thought I'd post it here in case it's something that can be dealt with.

I've only had that happen once with another version I've been running since May and this happened in the first two days I ran 28.3.

markr · 2014-01-23, 09:04

I think messages like that are covered in the readme.txt. (Just checked.) Yes, it's there, near the end.)

kracker · 2014-01-26, 04:33

On LL tests, is it possible to add time renaming(like CUDALucas, clLucas etc)?

sonjohan · 2014-01-28, 09:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by kracker

On LL tests, is it possible to add time renaming(like CUDALucas, clLucas etc)?

I think that's covered with the 'status' popup.

kladner · 2014-01-28, 12:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by kracker

On LL tests, is it possible to add time renaming(like CUDALucas, clLucas etc)?

Lysdexics untie?

kracker · 2014-01-28, 15:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by kladner

Lysdexics untie?

:facepalm:

henryzz · 2014-01-28, 18:25

Can I suggest modifications/additions to the benchmark including things like n single core ll tests at once. That could possibly be done for various fft lengths although we wouldn't want to push up the benchmark time too much. It would be nice to have how memory limited a cpu is in the benchmark. 1 test on 4 cores doesn't behave quite the same.

Also making it run the same AffinityScramble as normal tests would be useful.

chalsall · 2014-01-28, 19:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by henryzz

Also making it run the same AffinityScramble as normal tests would be useful.

Seconded.

lalera · 2014-01-29, 03:45

username : america64
i do use v28.3
i reserved M65378393 for p-1 at gpu72 and i can not upload the result
P-1 found a factor in stage #2, B1=545000, B2=10355000, E=12.
UID: ANONYMOUS, M65378393 has a factor: 53709915590644747022698801 (P-1 B1=545000, B2=10355000, E=12)

kladner · 2014-01-29, 04:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by lalera

username : america64
i do use v28.3
i reserved M65378393 for p-1 at gpu72 and i can not upload the result
P-1 found a factor in stage #2, B1=545000, B2=10355000, E=12.
UID: ANONYMOUS, M65378393 has a factor: 53709915590644747022698801 (P-1 B1=545000, B2=10355000, E=12)

Were you unable to upload at-
http://www.mersenne.org/manual_result/
?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
LLR beta Version 3.8.13 (deprecated)	Jean Penné	Software	111	2015-01-26 21:41
Prime95 beta version 28.4	Prime95	Software	20	2014-03-02 02:51
Prime95 version 27.1 early preview, not-even-close-to-beta release	Prime95	Software	126	2012-02-09 16:17
Beta version 24.12 available	Prime95	Software	33	2005-06-14 13:19
Beta version of PRP	Prime95	PSearch	15	2004-09-17 19:21

2014-01-22, 19:31	#35
TheMawn May 2013 East. Always East. 11×157 Posts	I've seen it once, too. Just thought I'd post it here in case it's something that can be dealt with. I've only had that happen once with another version I've been running since May and this happened in the first two days I ran 28.3.

2014-01-23, 09:04	#36
markr "Mark" Feb 2003 Sydney 3×191 Posts	I think messages like that are covered in the readme.txt. (Just checked.) Yes, it's there, near the end.)

2014-01-26, 04:33	#37
kracker "Mr. Meeseeks" Jan 2012 California, USA 878₁₆ Posts	On LL tests, is it possible to add time renaming(like CUDALucas, clLucas etc)?

2014-01-28, 18:25	#41
henryzz Just call me Henry "David" Sep 2007 Cambridge (GMT/BST) 2³×3×5×7² Posts	Can I suggest modifications/additions to the benchmark including things like n single core ll tests at once. That could possibly be done for various fft lengths although we wouldn't want to push up the benchmark time too much. It would be nice to have how memory limited a cpu is in the benchmark. 1 test on 4 cores doesn't behave quite the same. Also making it run the same AffinityScramble as normal tests would be useful.

2014-01-29, 03:45	#43
lalera Jul 2003 263₁₆ Posts	username : america64 i do use v28.3 i reserved M65378393 for p-1 at gpu72 and i can not upload the result P-1 found a factor in stage #2, B1=545000, B2=10355000, E=12. UID: ANONYMOUS, M65378393 has a factor: 53709915590644747022698801 (P-1 B1=545000, B2=10355000, E=12)