20090916, 03:11  #45  
"Phil"
Sep 2002
Tracktown, U.S.A.
2·13·43 Posts 
Quote:
Ben, I tend to agree with you if the error rate is low. I would appreciate hearing from any prp testers who are overclocking, and we could rerun a sample of your tests first. It would not be too costly to retest one number from each work file to get a general idea of the error rate. 

20090916, 03:28  #46  
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT5)
14151_{8} Posts 
Quote:


20090916, 16:28  #47  
Jun 2003
Ottawa, Canada
2×3^{2}×5×13 Posts 
Quote:
Only one of my machines is overclocked but I think I only did a few PRP checks with that almost all of them were with normally clocked systems. But doing a random sample to get an idea of the error rate would be a good idea. Jeff. 

20090916, 17:50  #48 
May 2007
11^{2} Posts 
My boxes are overclock only 14fsb for stability. That is less than 5% oc. For an overclocker that is very minimal. Since my goal is stability, anything more defeats the science. That is years of experience.
If you guys want to do double check on my wu's please do so. Just let me know if you find any discrepancies. I feel they will match but who knows. Non oc'd boxes also produces random errors due to peripheral errors like memory and such. 
20090916, 19:23  #49 
"Phil"
Sep 2002
Tracktown, U.S.A.
45E_{16} Posts 
Here's my suggestion: we randomly pick one test to check out of each work file, going as far back as 1.25 million. Split these tests into 3 work files and ask for volunteers. (I can even arrange it so that no one has to double check their own work.) Each work file should require about 8590% of the computation time as an average firsttime work file. We get the results back and look at the error rate, and go from there.

20090916, 19:42  #50 
May 2007
121_{10} Posts 

20090916, 21:46  #51 
Jun 2008
Wollongong, .au
267_{8} Posts 
*waves a hand to do some more DC work*

20090916, 23:07  #52 
May 2007
11^{2} Posts 

20090917, 03:54  #53 
"Phil"
Sep 2002
Tracktown, U.S.A.
45E_{16} Posts 
Engracio says he is game to do a doublecheck file, and I can do the third. It may be a couple of weeks before I get them sorted out, so go ahead and grab some more first time checks if you run out of work in the meantime.

20090917, 13:48  #54 
Jun 2003
Ottawa, Canada
2×3^{2}×5×13 Posts 
If you want/need to split it a bit more so people don't double check their own work, I can also take a DC work file as well.

20090917, 17:31  #55 
"Phil"
Sep 2002
Tracktown, U.S.A.
2×13×43 Posts 
Thanks, Jeff, that will be helpful. I'll set up 4 double check files then, each of which will be about 6065% of the work in our current work files.

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
P1 discussion thread  Rincewind  Five or Bust  The Dual Sierpinski Problem  57  20110206 21:53 
Sieving discussion thread  jasong  Twin Prime Search  311  20101022 18:41 
Sieving discussion thread  philmoore  Five or Bust  The Dual Sierpinski Problem  66  20100210 14:34 
Theological Discussion Thread  clowns789  Soap Box  3  20060309 04:05 
New Sieve Thread Discussion  Citrix  Prime Sierpinski Project  15  20050829 13:56 