![]() |
|
|
#914 |
|
Dec 2011
After 1.58M nines:)
1,699 Posts |
So only thing I changed from before is that 64*920^n+1 il a lot smaller then 3.8 M other candidates. Maybe B2 is depend on candidate size.
I will rerun test with TF value https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpost.php?p=620989&postcount=812 This is how I work with Prime95 before: and one worker is always use full memory, second calculate first part.... Last fiddled with by pepi37 on 2023-05-18 at 14:56 |
|
|
|
|
|
#915 | |
|
Random Account
Aug 2009
Not U. + S.A.
B2B16 Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#916 |
|
Dec 2011
After 1.58M nines:)
1,699 Posts |
Pminus1=64,920,308410,1,100000,20000000
|
|
|
|
|
|
#917 |
|
Dec 2011
After 1.58M nines:)
1,699 Posts |
My question had bad formulation, so I will try to ask again. All files are in one zip, attached.
There is local.txt, results.txt, worktodo.txt and window.txt ( contain one worker window) So question is ( for example) in two candidates in the row one use more memory, and second use far less memory, even fact they have nearly 29 GB RAM free. So what algo Prime95 use, and how I can say that Prime95 use all memory for every test. Code:
[May 19 16:17:55] Available memory is 28594MB. [May 19 16:17:55] Switching to all-complex FMA3 FFT length 640K, Pass1=512, Pass2=1280, clm=2, 4 threads [May 19 16:17:55] Estimated stage 2 vs. stage 1 runtime ratio: 0.765 [May 19 16:17:57] Using 22057MB of memory. D: 1050, 120x4184 polynomial multiplication. [May 19 16:18:00] Stage 2 init complete. 2948 transforms. Time: 4.460 sec. [May 19 16:18:51] 64*920^462706+1 stage 2 complete. 95619 transforms. Total time: 50.533 sec. [May 19 16:18:51] Round off: 0.34375 [May 19 16:18:51] Stage 2 GCD complete. Time: 0.643 sec. [May 19 16:18:51] 64*920^462706+1 completed P-1, B1=100000, B2=13665750, Wi4: 0CCC1D93 [May 19 16:18:51] [May 19 16:18:51] P-1 on 64*920^463018+1 with B1=100000, B2=10000000 [May 19 16:18:51] Chance of finding a factor is an estimated 4.62% [May 19 16:18:51] Using all-complex FMA3 FFT length 512K, Pass1=512, Pass2=1K, clm=1, 4 threads [May 19 16:19:59] 64*920^463018+1 stage 1 complete. 288858 transforms. Total time: 67.858 sec. [May 19 16:19:59] Round off: 0.2109375 [May 19 16:20:00] Inversion of stage 1 result complete. 5 transforms, 1 modular inverse. Time: 1.217 sec. [May 19 16:20:01] Available memory is 28594MB. [May 19 16:20:01] Switching to all-complex FMA3 FFT length 640K, Pass1=512, Pass2=1280, clm=2, 4 threads [May 19 16:20:01] Estimated stage 2 vs. stage 1 runtime ratio: 0.735 [May 19 16:20:02] Using 16582MB of memory. D: 1050, 120x3120 polynomial multiplication. [May 19 16:20:05] Stage 2 init complete. 2948 transforms. Time: 4.463 sec. [May 19 16:20:52] 64*920^463018+1 stage 2 complete. 93121 transforms. Total time: 47.326 sec. [May 19 16:20:52] Round off: 0.3125 [May 19 16:20:53] Stage 2 GCD complete. Time: 0.631 sec. [May 19 16:20:53] 64*920^463018+1 completed P-1, B1=100000, B2=13304550, Wi4: 0CC39868 Last fiddled with by pepi37 on 2023-05-19 at 15:40 |
|
|
|
|
|
#918 | |
|
Random Account
Aug 2009
Not U. + S.A.
3·953 Posts |
Quote:
Code:
Memory=28600 during 7:30-23:30 else 29000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#919 | |
|
Dec 2011
After 1.58M nines:)
169910 Posts |
Quote:
Memory=28600 during 7:30-23:30 else 29000 Problem is next: when Prime95 use more memory then will go further in B2 and change for find factor will be better. Maybe I need to lift up B1 bound? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#920 | ||
|
P90 years forever!
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL
827910 Posts |
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
|
|
|
|
|
#921 | |
|
Dec 2011
After 1.58M nines:)
1,699 Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#922 | |
|
Random Account
Aug 2009
Not U. + S.A.
3×953 Posts |
Quote:
You seem to be fighting with what you are doing. B1 uses very little memory. B2 will adjust itself based on your memory setting if you allow it. You are trying to force it using the Pminus1 form. I do not believe this will do any good. It may even slow it down. I feel it would be better to use the PFactor form. This will allow Prime95 to use what it needs, as I described above. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#923 | |
|
Dec 2011
After 1.58M nines:)
1,699 Posts |
Quote:
64*920^300082+1 does not need P-1 factoring. So this is not solution (for my case) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#924 | |
|
Dec 2011
After 1.58M nines:)
1,699 Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Do not post your results here! | kar_bon | Prime Wiki | 40 | 2022-04-03 19:05 |
| what should I post ? | science_man_88 | science_man_88 | 24 | 2018-10-19 23:00 |
| Where to post job ad? | xilman | Linux | 2 | 2010-12-15 16:39 |
| Moderated Post | kar_bon | Forum Feedback | 3 | 2010-09-28 08:01 |
| Something that I just had to post/buy | dave_0273 | Lounge | 1 | 2005-02-27 18:36 |