PrimeNet 5.0 Upgrade

[petrw1]

Originally Posted by Prime95

V4 credits? Those wouldn't be in the count either.

Only 139 there:

v4-LL 110 
v4-TF 29

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by petrw1

As expected each extra bit level about doubles the elapsed time ...

... with one exception:

From 64 to 65 bits my PIII time is almost quadruple 63 to 64 bits.

Bits    P4 (Hrs)  PIII (Hrs)
64    0.35      1.37
65    0.63      6.34

Is this simply a result of 32 vs 64 bit architecture?

Not simply, but yes, there is a second-order 64-bit architecture effect.

Basically, on 32-bit architecture the registers used for integer arithmetic are 64 bits wide. Numbers less than 2⁶⁴ can be operated-upon by a single integer instruction. When the numbers involved are greater than 2⁶⁴, so that they are 65 or more bits long, integer arithmetic operations on them have to be performed by two or more instructions, _plus_ instructions for combining the 64-bit result parts (e.g., carries from the low-order part to the high-order part) appropriately.

So far, this is true regardless of whether the underlying architecture is "32-bit" or "64-bit", because it depends on the register width, not the bus width or address length. Perhaps the "64-bit" architecture enables 64-bit integer arithmetic registers to operate somewhat faster, but that wouldn't change the fact that a 65-bit number would require _at least_ two instructions for each integer arithmetic operation.

However, "64-bit" architecture probably has 128-bit-wide registers for integer arithmetic. This allows a 65-bit number to be handled in a single integer arithmetic operation instead of two or more, and thus eliminates the more-than-doubling number of instructions for numbers greater than 2⁶⁴, compared to the instructions needed for numbers less than 2⁶⁴.

So, you see a more-than-doubling jump in time when going past the 2⁶⁴ size of numbers on 32-bit architecture that has 64-bit integer arithmetic registers (or on 64-bit architecture that has 64-bit registers), but not on 64-bit architecture that has 128-bit registers.

[S485122]

Would it be possible to post the formula used to calculate the credit for the different types of assigments :
- TF factor found,
- TF no factor found,
- P-1 Factor found in stage 1,
- P-1 factor found in stage 2,
- P-1 no factor found,
- LL checks.

There are changes over the previous version.

Jacob

[James Heinrich]

Originally Posted by S485122

Would it be possible to post the formula used to calculate the credit for the different types of assigments

I had asked that in this thread... haven't received much response (yet?)

[ET_]

Originally Posted by Prime95

The team web pages need a lot of work - they will improve over time. There is no way to change the password.

OK, then I'll wait some weeks before updating Team_Italia stats.

Though I was sure that some PW handling could be done from server side (like deleting a Team and recreating it). I'll be living with it, waiting to know which updates may be done from team pages.

Now, the last question:
3 - Once a user has joined a team, is it possible for the user to still see his personal stats ranking together with team stats ranking?

Don't bother to answer me if the answer has to do with the team pages work...

Thanks George!

Luigi

[Prime95]

Originally Posted by S485122

Would it be possible to post the formula used to calculate the credit for the different types of assigments :
- TF factor found,
- TF no factor found,
- P-1 Factor found in stage 1,
- P-1 factor found in stage 2,
- P-1 no factor found,
- LL checks.

There are changes over the previous version.

Hope you can read PHP code.

[S485122]

Originally Posted by Prime95

Hope you can read PHP code.

First time I read PHP but I think I can, especially with code that is so well documented. To be able to use that piece of code one needs access to the table "t_gimps_credit_timings".

And shouldn't the P-1 credit be the difference between the P-1 work already done and the reported work ? Or is that part of the code in another module ?

Jacob

[Prime95]

Originally Posted by S485122

And shouldn't the P-1 credit be the difference between the P-1 work already done and the reported work ? Or is that part of the code in another module ?

That's the cheesehead bug. You can pad your P-1 stats (until you're caught and I manually zero them :)

Remember P-1 is really only supposed to be done once.

[Prime95]

Originally Posted by S485122

To be able to use that piece of code one needs access to the table "t_gimps_credit_timings".

fftlen timing min_exponent max exponent
32 8.7840000000000003E-7 0 743
48 1.1399999999999999E-6 743 1099
64 1.4087999999999998E-6 1099 1469
80 0.0000017592 1469 1827
96 0.000002052 1827 2179
112 2.4623999999999999E-6 2179 2539
128 2.5271999999999997E-6 2539 2905
160 3.5639999999999997E-6 2905 3613
192 4.2935999999999999E-6 3613 4311
224 5.2511999999999998E-6 4311 5029
256 5.4743999999999996E-6 5029 5755
320 7.3439999999999995E-6 5755 7149
384 8.7839999999999992E-6 7149 8527
448 0.000010536 8527 9933
512 1.1327999999999999E-5 9933 11359
640 1.7039999999999999E-5 11359 14119
768 2.0591999999999999E-5 14119 16839
896 2.5415999999999999E-5 16839 19639
1024 2.7647999999999997E-5 19639 22477
1280 3.9119999999999998E-5 22477 27899
1536 4.7592000000000001E-5 27899 33289
1792 5.6879999999999998E-5 33289 38799
2048 6.1680000000000006E-5 38799 44339
2560 8.5199999999999997E-5 44339 55099
3072 1.0247999999999999E-4 55099 65729
3584 0.00012648 65729 76559
4096 1.2959999999999998E-4 76559 87549
5120 0.000192 87549 108800
6144 2.2559999999999998E-4 108800 129900
7168 2.7599999999999999E-4 129900 151300
8192 0.0002856 151300 172700
10240 3.9839999999999998E-4 172700 214400
12288 4.8479999999999997E-4 214400 255300
14336 5.9040000000000004E-4 255300 297300
16384 6.1439999999999997E-4 297300 340400
20480 8.3760000000000008E-4 340400 423300
24576 0.0010176 423300 504600
28672 1.2599999999999998E-3 504600 587500
32768 1.3127999999999998E-3 587500 671400
40960 1.7256000000000001E-3 671400 835200
49152 2.0951999999999998E-3 835200 995500
57344 2.5607999999999998E-3 995500 1158000
65536 2.7384000000000002E-3 1158000 1325000
81920 3.8592000000000001E-3 1325000 1648000
98304 4.6871999999999999E-3 1648000 1966000
114688 5.6808000000000006E-3 1966000 2287000
131072 5.9928000000000004E-3 2287000 2614000
163840 7.3535999999999992E-3 2614000 3251000
196608 9.0743999999999998E-3 3251000 3875000
229376 1.0775999999999999E-2 3875000 4512000
262144 1.1975999999999999E-2 4512000 5158000
327680 1.5311999999999999E-2 5158000 6421000
393216 1.8839999999999999E-2 6421000 7651000
458752 0.02256 7651000 8908000
524288 0.0252 8908000 10180000
655360 3.3264000000000002E-2 10180000 12650000
786432 4.1375999999999996E-2 12650000 15070000
917504 4.9200000000000001E-2 15070000 17550000
1048576 5.5920000000000004E-2 17550000 20050000
1310720 7.0080000000000003E-2 20050000 24930000
1572864 8.5919999999999996E-2 24930000 29690000
1835008 0.10224 29690000 34560000
2097152 0.11375999999999999 34560000 39500000
2621440 0.14999999999999999 39500000 49100000
3145728 0.18312 49100000 58520000
3670016 0.21839999999999998 58520000 68130000
4194304 0.24360000000000001 68130000 77910000
5242880 0.31295999999999996 77910000 96830000
6291456 0.37919999999999998 96830000 115300000
7340032 0.45839999999999997 115300000 134200000
8388608 0.504 134200000 153400000
10485760 0.67200000000000004 153400000 190700000
12582912 0.81120000000000003 190700000 227300000
14680064 0.98399999999999987 227300000 264600000
16777216 1.0800000000000001 264600000 302600000
20971520 1.4903999999999999 302600000 376100000
25165824 1.8215999999999999 376100000 448000000
29360128 2.1791999999999998 448000000 521500000
33554432 2.3832 521500000 596000000

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by cheesehead

in this hard-for-me-to-read yellowish (or-greenish?) color. (I have red-green-color-deficient vision.)

hard-for-me-to-read color: "!!At least one CPU is 90 days or more unreported and appears lost.".

I'm using Firefox 3.0

I found the way to adjust text colors in Firefox, so will try to remember not to complain about colors again.

[retina]

Originally Posted by 1997rj7

What happened to the Completed link that used to be in the Lifetime Stats section of your account report? Is there another way to see what has completed?

I think this is a good reason to get rid of the menus completely. Firstly, they don't work without JS. Secondly, they hide links forcing people to click multiple times to find the link they really want. Thirdly, even with all the menus open it still doesn't fill an entire page height so they are not allowing people to see more that might otherwise "be lost" below the screen. Fourthly, after opening a menu item and clicking on a hidden (now exposed) link then the next page will collapse all the menus again (very annoying).

I wonder what problem was being solved by the addition of the collapsed menu items? I hope it wasn't only added just because it could be added (or maybe even because it "looked nicer?).

I vote to restore the fully expanded menus items (no JS please, it is just not necessary). With all the items shown it would much easier to find what one wants without having to click everywhere to expose links.