RIP DCTF.

[Mark Rose]

Originally Posted by petrw1

Are there not, though exponents above 60M that have LL but NOT DC that also should be TF'd higher before DC is done?

Yes, but I think Chris isn't worried about those since we are many years away from DC'ing those exponents.

I guess it would make sense for the Estimated Days to Completion PrimeNet page though.

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Mark Rose

Yes, but I think Chris isn't worried about those since we are many years away from DC'ing those exponents.

Many, MANY years.

[LaurV]

Originally Posted by petrw1

Currently GPU72 lists exponents below 60M that need DCTF (that is LL done DC NOT done and TF level deemed too low).

Are there not, though exponents above 60M that have LL but NOT DC that also should be TF'd higher before DC is done?

Actually... hm... no, they are not. All LL done since GPU72's "inception" was done high enough (74 bits, and very seldom we released 73 bits expos due to high LL wave pressure). Very few exceptions are exponents over 60M that were LL _before_ the GPU72 era, and were not enough TF-ed (remember, some users, myself included, _did_ TF by themselves for exponents they reserved for LL, "just in case", to higher bits, long before GPU72, remember the "lists" we used to keep on the forum or else, manual work done, etc - in fact that effort gave birth to GPU72, together with Chris' enthusiasm). The few exceptions, most probably some of us with few beefy cards could go through them in few days, when their time will come (however let me doubt about the "years" part).

[tigreroars]

How do yo guys figure out how many "days" we are ahead of the wave?

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by tigreroars

How do yo guys figure out how many "days" we are ahead of the wave?

It's impossible to be exact, but basically we take a look at how many candidates are "appropriately" TF'ed vs. how many are LL'ed / DC'ed per day for the ranges.

As an example, in the DC range over the last month approximately 165 candidates were DC'ed a day. At the moment, approximately 8,000 candidates are "ready" ahead of the Cat 4 "wave". So, we're ~48 days ahead if all DCTF'ing was to stop.

Then consider that we're currently doing about 40 DCTFs to 72 (in 40M) a day, so if things continue as they are we're ~64 days ahead.

[petrw1]

90,719 in the last month.
69 different contributors
196 Factors found
12,564 P1/LL/DC work saved

15 contributors currently have assignments
1,455 Assignments out.

2,458.5887 estimated days to completion (12 times as long as the lowest it ever was ... under 200 days)
6.73 years.

[Mark Rose]

Originally Posted by petrw1

2,458.5887 estimated days to completion (12 times as long as the lowest it ever was ... under 200 days)
6.73 years.

To be fair, that was before adding factoring beyond 71 bits. For the work below 71 bits, we're at 467 days.

I know my time with GIMPS will come to an end at some point, basically as soon as I no longer have free electricity, which is very likely to happen in two years or less.

It has never been about finding the actual primes for me. The fun is participating in a distributed computing project. Trial factoring is fun.

That being said, I still have the desire to "finish" something. I would do all the work below 70, but LaurV and possibly others have AMD cards that work better in that range, so finishing the DCTF work below 71 is my plan.

I might be able to slide into 1st place on the DCTF charts by the end of summer, assuming the really big guns like LaurV and NickOfTime don't throw everything at DCTF :)

[petrw1]

Originally Posted by Mark Rose

To be fair, that was before adding factoring beyond 71 bits. For the work below 71 bits, we're at 467 days.)

I stand corrected.....we were as low as 388 shortly after the extra bit level was added.

[Gordon]

Originally Posted by chalsall

[snip]

Then consider that we're currently doing about 40 DCTFs to 72 (in 40M) a day,

[snip]

You sure about that? My GTX-970 is doing 32 a day by itself - about one every 44 minutes

[chalsall]

Originally Posted by Gordon

You sure about that? My GTX-970 is doing 32 a day by itself - about one every 44 minutes

I am often wrong! I was eye-balling it from this graph.

If you're doing the work through GPU72, then I have a bug. If I do, please PM me your GPU72 username or Display Name and I'll drill down.

[Gordon]

Originally Posted by chalsall

I am often wrong! I was eye-balling it from this graph.

If you're doing the work through GPU72, then I have a bug. If I do, please PM me your GPU72 username or Display Name and I'll drill down.

PM sent