My CPU is getting faster and faster ;-)

lidocorc · 2008-11-07, 05:17

According to undoc.txt I'm using "CumulativeTiming=1" in prime.txt. As a result p95 outputs iteration times like this:

[Nov 6 15:01] Worker starting
[Nov 6 15:01] Setting affinity to run worker on logical CPU #0
[Nov 6 15:01] Resuming primality test of M42759653 using FFT length 2560K
[Nov 6 15:01] Iteration: 21583618 / 42759653 [50.47%].
[Nov 6 15:32] Iteration: 21600000 / 42759653 [50.51%]. Per iteration time: 0.113 sec.
[Nov 6 18:38] Iteration: 21700000 / 42759653 [50.74%]. Per iteration time: 0.096 sec.
[Nov 6 21:54] Iteration: 21800000 / 42759653 [50.98%]. Per iteration time: 0.054 sec.
[Nov 7 01:05] Iteration: 21900000 / 42759653 [51.21%]. Per iteration time: 0.036 sec.
[Nov 7 04:01] Iteration: 22000000 / 42759653 [51.45%]. Per iteration time: 0.025 sec.

It would be nice, if it were true.

lidocorc · 2008-11-08, 07:33

Of course this is meant as bug report. Since nobody is answering, I guess this is the wrong subforum to place it. But where else?

NBtarheel_33 · 2008-11-08, 09:26

This has been made note of on the forum at least a couple of times, I think. It's one of those things that is annoying, but at the same time won't break GIMPS, so I think that George has it on the back burner for now. But I agree it would be nice to have it working again eventually. It does work for trial factoring, though, strangely enough.

2008-11-07, 05:17	#1
lidocorc Nov 2008 Rosenheim, Germany 18₁₆ Posts	My CPU is getting faster and faster ;-) According to undoc.txt I'm using "CumulativeTiming=1" in prime.txt. As a result p95 outputs iteration times like this: [Nov 6 15:01] Worker starting [Nov 6 15:01] Setting affinity to run worker on logical CPU #0 [Nov 6 15:01] Resuming primality test of M42759653 using FFT length 2560K [Nov 6 15:01] Iteration: 21583618 / 42759653 [50.47%]. [Nov 6 15:32] Iteration: 21600000 / 42759653 [50.51%]. Per iteration time: 0.113 sec. [Nov 6 18:38] Iteration: 21700000 / 42759653 [50.74%]. Per iteration time: 0.096 sec. [Nov 6 21:54] Iteration: 21800000 / 42759653 [50.98%]. Per iteration time: 0.054 sec. [Nov 7 01:05] Iteration: 21900000 / 42759653 [51.21%]. Per iteration time: 0.036 sec. [Nov 7 04:01] Iteration: 22000000 / 42759653 [51.45%]. Per iteration time: 0.025 sec. It would be nice, if it were true.

2008-11-08, 09:26	#3
NBtarheel_33 "Nathan" Jul 2008 Maryland, USA 5×223 Posts	Yes, this is a known bug. This has been made note of on the forum at least a couple of times, I think. It's one of those things that is annoying, but at the same time won't break GIMPS, so I think that George has it on the back burner for now. But I agree it would be nice to have it working again eventually. It does work for trial factoring, though, strangely enough.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
faster than LL?	paulunderwood	Miscellaneous Math	13	2016-08-02 00:05
Is it faster to run 1 worker or many?	arbiter21	Information & Answers	17	2016-02-05 05:04
3-PRP faster than LL for GIMPS?	bearnol	Math	35	2005-10-12 14:33
Faster way to do LLT?	1260	Miscellaneous Math	23	2005-09-04 07:12
Faster than LL?	clowns789	Miscellaneous Math	3	2004-05-27 23:39

2008-11-08, 07:33	#2
lidocorc Nov 2008 Rosenheim, Germany 2³×3 Posts	Of course this is meant as bug report. Since nobody is answering, I guess this is the wrong subforum to place it. But where else?