20200415, 08:59  #23 
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest
3×2,281 Posts 

20200415, 09:08  #24  
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest
3·2,281 Posts 
Quote:
Presumably this has the same 32bit exponent limit as mfaktc. If you have any plans to take that higher, a 67bit limit would be useful for a couple of exponents I've been trying to factor lately. (I'm currently using Mfactor for those. Mmff is not suitable for them since they are not doublemersennes.) Since there would be a performance hit, it's probably best to keep the 32bitexponent version available. Last fiddled with by kriesel on 20200415 at 09:17 

20200920, 20:13  #25 
Mar 2011
Germany
97 Posts 
Good news, finally I was able to implement negative bases.
Also the problem with the 1660 card should be fixed now. I attached the source code and 64 bit binaries for Linux and Windows. As usual test first if all tests are running successfully with Code:
./grmfaktc.exe st Code:
Selftest statistics number of tests 49113 successfull tests 49113 kernel  success  fail ++ UNKNOWN kernel  0  0 64bit_mul32  8631  0 75bit_mul32  9710  0 95bit_mul32  9915  0 64bit_mul32_gs  6188  0 75bit_mul32_gs  7246  0 95bit_mul32_gs  7423  0 selftest PASSED! Code:
./grmfaktc.exe tf 97 4956227 1 64 Code:
Factor=4763923,60,61 Factor=base=127,1055167,1,64 Factor=base=97,1055167,1,64 Factor=base=17,1055167,1,64 Factor=base=10,1055167,1,64 Factor=4763923,60,61 Some additional notes: I wrote a Mathematica notebook that allows to calculate the allowed remainders for any base. The script's source code can be extracted from the file allowedremaindersdata.c I give some results here: Code:
base > {{<remainder list>}, <modulo value>}  13 > {{1, 7, 9, 11, 15, 17, 19, 25, 29, 31, 47, 49}, 52} 12 > {{1, 7, 13, 19}, 24}} 11 > {{1, 3, 5, 9, 15, 23, 25, 27, 31, 37}, 44} 10 > {{1, 7, 9, 11, 13, 19, 23, 37}, 40} 2 > {{1, 3}, 8} 2 > {{1, 7}, 8} 10 > {{1, 3, 9, 13, 27, 31, 37, 39}, 40} 11 > {{1, 5, 7, 9, 19, 25, 35, 37, 39, 43}, 44} 12 > {{1, 11, 13, 23}, 24} 13 > {{1, 3, 4, 9, 10, 12}, 13} Have fun. Cheers, Danilo Last fiddled with by MrRepunit on 20200920 at 20:15 
20201109, 08:44  #26 
Nov 2020
Russia
2_{10} Posts 
I found some problem.
In the result grmfaktc 0.21 I get factor. When I run mprime 30.3 I don't get factor. Sample: grmfacktc 0.21 Code:
R[10]211584161 has a factor: 11109304798164647139787 [TF:73:74:mfaktc 0.21 75bit_mul32_gs] found 1 factor for R[10]211584161 from 2^73 to 2^74 [mfaktc 0.21 75bit_mul32_gs] Code:
M211584161 no factor from 2^73 to 2^74, Wh8: bla, AID: bla Error in the grmfaktc or maybe the settings need to be changed? 
20201110, 08:17  #27  
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2
9942_{10} Posts 
Quote:
R_{10}211584161 is a shorthand for (10^2115841611)/9. That's 211584161 "ones" in decimal notation. M211584161 is a shorthand for 2^2115841611. That's 211584161 "ones" in binary notation (and a much smaller number). Two different numbers. One has a factor and the other does not. You can test, using Pari/GP. F=11109304798164647139787; print(Mod(10,F)^2115841611) Download gp, start gp, run these two lines. The result indeed confirms that it = 0, ergo F does divide R_{10}211584161 

20201110, 09:48  #28 
Nov 2020
Russia
2 Posts 
Thank you, it worked
I changed the line with the assignment in worktodo.txt to Code:
Factor=bla,base=2,211584161,71,72 
20201110, 23:57  #29 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2
26D6_{16} Posts 
Then you turned it into mfaktc (which is its parent program).
Trouble is that more universal programs need extra registers to hold variables (that are in the stricter program a constant), and the class selection/enumeration code is probably more involved than in its parent mfaktc. Are the registers going to be used better or worse when you are compiling a program that does more? Have you run timing tests? So it is unclear if this is simply slower than to run strict mfaktc (where base=2 as a constant throughout the code, by definition). 
20201111, 07:33  #30  
Bemusing Prompter
"Danny"
Dec 2002
California
3·827 Posts 
Quote:
Last fiddled with by ixfd64 on 20201111 at 22:02 

20201111, 14:36  #31  
"James Heinrich"
May 2004
exNorthern Ontario
11×349 Posts 
Quote:


20201111, 19:36  #32  
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest
3×2,281 Posts 
Quote:
Last fiddled with by kriesel on 20201111 at 19:36 

20201111, 19:56  #33  
"James Heinrich"
May 2004
exNorthern Ontario
11·349 Posts 
Quote:


Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
mfaktc: a CUDA program for Mersenne prefactoring  TheJudger  GPU Computing  3541  20220421 22:37 
mfakto: an OpenCL program for Mersenne prefactoring  Bdot  GPU Computing  1684  20220419 20:25 
The P1 factoring CUDA program  firejuggler  GPU Computing  753  20201212 18:07 
World's seconddumbest CUDA program  fivemack  Programming  112  20150212 22:51 
World's dumbest CUDA program?  xilman  Programming  1  20091116 10:26 