![]() |
|
|
#144 |
|
Romulan Interpreter
Jun 2011
Thailand
5·1,931 Posts |
I am with you here (read: I will not blame you for it, unless someone else blames me for it
)
|
|
|
|
|
#145 |
|
Serpentine Vermin Jar
Jul 2014
3,313 Posts |
Here's an updated list. I'm laying claim to doing triple-checks on the ones between 21M and 22M since I finished the last of the 20M-21M numbers.
|
|
|
|
|
#146 |
|
Aug 2012
Mass., USA
2·3·53 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
#147 |
|
Romulan Interpreter
Jun 2011
Thailand
965510 Posts |
And why do you quote my message with that list?
|
|
|
|
|
#148 |
|
Serpentine Vermin Jar
Jul 2014
3,313 Posts |
|
|
|
|
|
#149 |
|
"Victor de Hollander"
Aug 2011
the Netherlands
23·3·72 Posts |
M24939227 has a factor: 2216644110838629719887
M25901983 has a factor: 1877785088209838147849 M26501791 has a factor: 1887069080169066172433 M26838139 has a factor: 1656114794350730091919 M28603763 has a factor: 1250967656026180632049 This concludes my TF work on the triple check candidates (in other words, you can mark my TF ranges as complete). |
|
|
|
|
#150 | |
|
Serpentine Vermin Jar
Jul 2014
CF116 Posts |
Quote:
"tigreroars" is doing the 35M-36M range up to 72 bits but other than that there's no more TF work anyone has signed up for (and maybe no more really needed). You can look over this latest list and see if there's anything that anyone would care to do to higher bit levels, but it's fine with me if it were left with what's there now. I also signed up to do the rest of the 22M range for triple-checking. |
|
|
|
|
|
#151 |
|
Mar 2014
Germany
23·3·5 Posts |
There is some more TF work, that should be done first, i.e. 39M+ is not ready yet. It should be at 71 up to 40M, at 72 from there on and even to 73 from ~50M. But I won't be doing that now, only if it is needed.
|
|
|
|
|
#152 | |
|
Nov 2013
24 Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
#153 | ||
|
Serpentine Vermin Jar
Jul 2014
3,313 Posts |
Quote:
![]() manfred4 says: Quote:
< 20M are all up to 69 bits 20M - 30M are all up to at least 71 bits 30M - 40M are all up to at least 71 bits except those aforementioned 12 that are still at 70 40M - 55M are all up to 74 bits 55M - 60M are all up to at least 72 bits with 3 exceptions (listed below) 60M + seem okay with a couple I question... Those 55-60M exceptions that are only at 71 bits are: DoubleCheck=55018393,71,1 DoubleCheck=55837657,71,1 DoubleCheck=58317893,71,1 This one in the 60M range is only at 73 bits but the rest of it's buddies are at 74: DoubleCheck=61088273,73,1 And I don't know about this one in the 90M range: DoubleCheck=90000607,72,1 I have a machine with that 90M exponent queued up to start running the triple-check in 21 hours, as soon as it finishes it's current check. If someone wanted to take that one up to a higher TF level before then, that'd be great. If a factor was found it'd save me an estimated 5 days on this 10-core worker. As for those other 4 exceptions I mentioned, I guess if someone wanted to take those a bit higher they could? As for the rest, I know VictordeHolland was taking his things to higher bits than manfred4 so any other TF work would depend on whatever you feel like doing. For instance, you took 35M-36M up to 72 bits, but the work that Nesowa has been doing was only taking the rest of the 30M range up to 71 bits. That's where most of them from 36M-40M live right now.
|
||
|
|
|
|
#154 | |
|
Nov 2013
1610 Posts |
Quote:
I don't have the optimal GPU graph infront of me, so I was thinking the 90M resided in the 75 or 76 bit range? Otherwise, it takes me 2 weeks for a CPU LL double check in the 33M range, so I'll let other people work on those triple chucks. I'll move my GPU back to closing the TF DC pile. |
|
|
|
![]() |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Double checks | casmith789 | PrimeNet | 7 | 2015-05-26 00:53 |
| Help doing some quadrup1e+ checks | Madpoo | Data | 28 | 2015-04-06 17:01 |
| Double checks | Rastus | Data | 1 | 2003-12-19 18:20 |
| How do I get rid of the Triple Checks?? | outlnder | Lounge | 4 | 2003-04-07 18:06 |
| Double-checks come in pairs? | BigRed | Software | 1 | 2002-10-20 05:29 |