PRP discussion thread - Page 8

paleseptember · 2010-02-08, 01:01

Just checking in with some ongoing benchmarks.
In the 5.7M ranges, prime95 is using a zero-padded FFT length 640K, with iteration times of approximately 0.015s/iteration on a stock Q6700 @ 2.66GHz running on three (of the four) cores. That translates to pretty much exactly 24 hours per test per core.
(This update was prompted by this thread concerning the efficacy of ECM and P-1 testing.)

Cybertronic · 2010-02-08, 10:00

Also a benchmark from me.

2^5720440+40291 is done in 19h on a 3.4 Ghz Phenom.

(Only estimated.)

Jeff Gilchrist · 2010-09-16, 15:25

Anyone try the new Prime95 v26 to see how much of a speed difference in any it makes with 5orB PRP tests?

http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?p=229780

Jeff.

geoff · 2010-09-19, 00:47

For 896K FFT, the per iteration time went from 0.020 with version 25.11 to 0.018 with version 26.2 on my Core 2 Duo 2.66GHz, so should save about 2 hours per test.

geoff · 2010-09-24, 03:06

More accurately, for the current PRP tests at ~8M (896K FFT) the new mprime version 26.2 takes 41h20m on my C2D 2.66GHz, which is a savings of almost 4 hours per test compared to version 25.11.

enderak · 2010-09-25, 00:04

v26 seems to be quite a bit faster on my i7 as well. Still early to tell exactly how much faster, but it seems to be about the same speedup as geoff.

Jeff Gilchrist · 2010-09-25, 10:20

Even my older Pentium D machine when from 0.032 sec/iter down to 0.027 sec/iter.

2010-02-08, 01:01	#78
paleseptember Jun 2008 Wollongong, .au B7₁₆ Posts	Just checking in with some ongoing benchmarks. In the 5.7M ranges, prime95 is using a zero-padded FFT length 640K, with iteration times of approximately 0.015s/iteration on a stock Q6700 @ 2.66GHz running on three (of the four) cores. That translates to pretty much exactly 24 hours per test per core. (This update was prompted by this thread concerning the efficacy of ECM and P-1 testing.) Last fiddled with by paleseptember on 2010-02-08 at 01:05

2010-02-08, 10:00	#79
Cybertronic Jan 2007 DEUTSCHLAND ! 110₁₆ Posts	Also a benchmark from me. 2^5720440+40291 is done in 19h on a 3.4 Ghz Phenom. (Only estimated.) Last fiddled with by Cybertronic on 2010-02-08 at 10:49

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
P-1 discussion thread	Rincewind	Five or Bust - The Dual Sierpinski Problem	57	2011-02-06 21:53
Sieving discussion thread	jasong	Twin Prime Search	311	2010-10-22 18:41
Sieving discussion thread	philmoore	Five or Bust - The Dual Sierpinski Problem	66	2010-02-10 14:34
Theological Discussion Thread	clowns789	Soap Box	3	2006-03-09 04:05
New Sieve Thread Discussion	Citrix	Prime Sierpinski Project	15	2005-08-29 13:56

2010-09-16, 15:25	#80
Jeff Gilchrist Jun 2003 Ottawa, Canada 7·167 Posts	Anyone try the new Prime95 v26 to see how much of a speed difference in any it makes with 5orB PRP tests? http://www.mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?p=229780 Jeff.

2010-09-19, 00:47	#81
geoff Mar 2003 New Zealand 13×89 Posts	For 896K FFT, the per iteration time went from 0.020 with version 25.11 to 0.018 with version 26.2 on my Core 2 Duo 2.66GHz, so should save about 2 hours per test.

2010-09-24, 03:06	#82
geoff Mar 2003 New Zealand 13×89 Posts	More accurately, for the current PRP tests at ~8M (896K FFT) the new mprime version 26.2 takes 41h20m on my C2D 2.66GHz, which is a savings of almost 4 hours per test compared to version 25.11.

2010-09-25, 00:04	#83
enderak Feb 2009 3×13 Posts	v26 seems to be quite a bit faster on my i7 as well. Still early to tell exactly how much faster, but it seems to be about the same speedup as geoff.

2010-09-25, 10:20	#84
Jeff Gilchrist Jun 2003 Ottawa, Canada 2221₈ Posts	Even my older Pentium D machine when from 0.032 sec/iter down to 0.027 sec/iter.