20150524, 11:39  #78 
Sep 2006
Odenton, MD, USA
2^{2}·41 Posts 
I just installed the 28.6 Windows 32bit software onto my older P4 system. I'm doing P1 testing and noticed that the B1 and B2 bounds are now lower. Just wondering if this is correct as I didn't see anything about the bounds changing in the whatsnew.txt file.
Last fiddled with by harlee on 20150524 at 11:42 Reason: fixed the number of bits from 35 to 32 
20150525, 03:06  #79 
Serpentine Vermin Jar
Jul 2014
6335_{8} Posts 
Version 28.6 and "ScaleOutputFrequency=1"
I just updated my triplechecking systems to version 28.6 and I'm noticing a difference in how the "ScaleOutputFrequency=1" option is working.
It doesn't seem to scale the update frequency of vastly different workers like it did in 28.5. The most extreme example is one system where I'm testing M383838383 on one socket, and a little 30M exponent on the other. I previously had the iterations between screen outputs set to 30000 and that worked fairly well. I could see progress on the big 383M and the 30M exponents moving along. Now it seems to ignore that option entirely and only updates either one at the actual specified rate, no scaling. I peeked at the source code changes between 28.5 and 28.6 and I do see some changes that happened in there, so I'm guessing that's the reason, but I didn't see anyone else mention this yet. 
20150525, 05:03  #80  
P90 years forever!
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL
2^{2}·1,873 Posts 
Quote:


20150525, 11:27  #81 
"Mihai Preda"
Apr 2015
10101010000_{2} Posts 
128GB RAM, E=12 in P1.
I run mprime on a system with 128GB of free memory, and I run a single thread of P1. It uses about about 30GB in stage 2 and the status is always E=12. The B2 bound is about 15M (B1 about 700K).
My questions are:  what's the meaning of E=12?  would P1 benefit from using more memory in stage 2? If yes, why it does not use it? In local.txt I have: Memory=400000 during 7:301:00 else 400000 
20150525, 11:57  #82 
"Oliver"
Mar 2005
Germany
11·101 Posts 
AFAIK current version of Prime95/mprime won't use more than ~30GB of memory in P1 stage 2 for current P1 wavefront assignments.
I've tried 2,5TiB for a single instance of P1, it simply just utilizes ~30GB at most. E=12 is for BrentSuyama extension Oliver 
20150525, 15:54  #83 
Serpentine Vermin Jar
Jul 2014
37·89 Posts 
Cool, thanks. I don't have any Haswell systems, but how does the AVX2 stuff look in 28.6/28.7? I think I saw some changes in the source related to that, which would be cool. I'm specing out some new servers which will have HaswellE chips so at some point I'll be able to do some burnin with those if you need some feedback down the road.

20150525, 17:58  #84  
Basketry That Evening!
"Bunslow the Bold"
Jun 2011
40<A<43 89<O<88
3·29·83 Posts 
Quote:


20150603, 01:23  #85 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2
9,433 Posts 
Continuing on the previous GWNUM library modification
George,
You've already improved the special case k=1; how about k=2? Just strictly k=2; there is no interest in higher k values but b is relatively large. Debug case is prepared: Can a PRP test for "PRP=2,67607,371171,1" use not a generic reduction AVX FFT length 640K (which the library choses): Code:
[Work thread Jun 2 18:08] Resuming PRP test of 2*67607^371171+1 using generic reduction AVX FFT length 640K, Pass1=640, Pass2=1K [Work thread Jun 2 18:08] Iteration: 2 / 5955397 [0.00%]. [Work thread Jun 2 18:08] Iteration: 500 / 5955397 [0.00%], roundoff: 0.047, ms/iter: 18.580, ETA: 30:44:04 [Work thread Jun 2 18:08] Iteration: 1000 / 5955397 [0.01%], roundoff: 0.047, ms/iter: 17.244, ETA: 28:31:18 [Work thread Jun 2 18:08] Iteration: 1500 / 5955397 [0.02%], roundoff: 0.047, ms/iter: 17.248, ETA: 28:31:33 [Work thread Jun 2 18:09] Iteration: 2000 / 5955397 [0.03%], roundoff: 0.047, ms/iter: 17.241, ETA: 28:30:41 [Work thread Jun 2 18:09] Iteration: 2500 / 5955397 [0.04%], roundoff: 0.047, ms/iter: 17.246, ETA: 28:31:03 Code:
[Work thread Jun 2 18:05] Starting PRP test of 2*67607^371171+1 using allcomplex AVX FFT length 1M, Pass1=256, Pass2=4K [Work thread Jun 2 18:05] Iteration: 500 / 5955397 [0.00%], roundoff: 0.395, ms/iter: 31.972, ETA: 52:53:07 [Work thread Jun 2 18:05] Iteration: 1000 / 5955397 [0.01%], roundoff: 0.395, ms/iter: 7.315, ETA: 12:05:54 [Work thread Jun 2 18:06] Iteration: 1500 / 5955397 [0.02%], roundoff: 0.395, ms/iter: 7.326, ETA: 12:06:56 [Work thread Jun 2 18:06] Iteration: 2000 / 5955397 [0.03%], roundoff: 0.395, ms/iter: 7.319, ETA: 12:06:12 [Work thread Jun 2 18:06] Iteration: 2500 / 5955397 [0.04%], roundoff: 0.395, ms/iter: 7.309, ETA: 12:05:12 [Work thread Jun 2 18:06] Iteration: 3000 / 5955397 [0.05%], roundoff: 0.395, ms/iter: 7.318, ETA: 12:05:57 Can we generalize/automate a similar allcomplex FFT2 choice for any PRP=2,67607,n,1 up to n of say 1M? Or maybe even improve to a better choice of a special FFT, if some light optimization is needed in the library? This is a special base for which no primes 2*b^n+1 are known. A prime of this form would divide some Phi(M,2) where M can be determined post hoc (with what is essentially a modified base 2 PRP test); for a large b, M is very likely to be b^n or b^{n1}. 
20150603, 13:41  #86 
P90 years forever!
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL
16504_{8} Posts 
Did you look at the roundoff error on your 1M allcomplex FFT? The gwnum code isn't using the 1M FFT because it is afraid of a fatal roundoff error during the PRP test.
gwnum does support some options to be a little less conservative in choosing FFT lengths, I'll look and see if prime95 exposes any of those features. 
20150603, 15:33  #87 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2
22331_{8} Posts 
There is some blanket rule that kicks in at n>10000 for FFT choice  and only generic reduction AVX FFT is used for all n's.
(For n<10000, allcomplex AVX FFT is used most of the time; I can send you a lightly sieved set of n, or else for debugging tests you can use any n.) If you use n=351111 for example, the error will be wellcontrolled for allcomplex AVX FFT, yet it will not be chosen. I think an appropriate sized allcomplex AVX FFT for this form can always be used, but even with forced FFT2=NNN I cannot force it because for some ranges of n, even the forced FFT2 does not force allcomplex, but a zeropadded instead. 
20150607, 15:00  #88 
"Ram Shanker"
May 2015
Delhi
2×19 Posts 
Official release of 28.7?
When is Ver 28.7 being released on official download page?

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Prime95 version 27.3  Prime95  Software  148  20120318 19:24 
Prime95 version 26.3  Prime95  Software  76  20101211 00:11 
Prime95 version 25.5  Prime95  PrimeNet  369  20080226 05:21 
Prime95 version 25.4  Prime95  PrimeNet  143  20070924 21:01 
When the next prime95 version ?  pacionet  Software  74  20061207 20:30 