20121228, 20:54  #1640 
If I May
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados
2^{2}×23×103 Posts 

20121228, 21:02  #1641 
ἀβουλία
"Mr. Meeseeks"
Jan 2012
California, USA
3^{2}·241 Posts 

20121229, 03:44  #1642 
1976 Toyota Corona years forever!
"Wayne"
Nov 2006
Saskatchewan, Canada
2^{3}·569 Posts 

20121229, 07:15  #1643 
"Victor de Hollander"
Aug 2011
the Netherlands
2^{3}·3·7^{2} Posts 
How can you compare a factor found in lets say the 900M range with one in the LL range? Finding a factor in the 900M range is much easier and saves hundreds if not even thousands times the GHzdays if we finally get there in 100 years.

20121229, 14:37  #1644 
Aug 2010
Kansas
547 Posts 
Well, a 70 bit factor for a 900M is about equal (iirc) to a 66 bit factor for 56M. TF credit (should? does?) reflect this, but the simple truth is it does save so much time iff these exponents are ever LL tested. I picture it like this: a composite exponent also could have a "GHz saved" amount if anyone was stupid enough to run it without the known factor, but not stupid enough to run it with a known factor.

20121229, 15:03  #1645 
"James Heinrich"
May 2004
exNorthern Ontario
3267_{10} Posts 
You need some kind of selfbalancing metric, perhaps something along the lines of
Code:
worth = GHd_saved * (GHd_factor / GHd_LL) // examples: // 72bit TF factor on 60M (TF to 2^{73}) value = (133.292 + 133.292 + 15.94) * (11.956 / 133.292) = 89.7 // 72bit TF factor on 900M (TF to 2^{84}) value = (24825 + 24825 + 4352) * (0.5314 / 24825) = 1.2 // 83bit TF factor on 900M (TF to 2^{84}) value = (24825 + 24825 + 2176) * (1088 / 24825) = 2271 // 93bit P1 factor on 900M (TF to 2^{84}) value = (24825 + 24825 + 0) * (684 / 24825) = 1368 
20121231, 20:37  #1646  
Jul 2006
USA (UT5) via UK (UT)
2^{2}×59 Posts 
Quote:
LL trial factoring work (/reports/workers/lltf/)? The graphs appear to be updated, but the table is outdated. And it doesn't appear to be a cache problem at my end. Gareth 

20130108, 23:01  #1647 
"James Heinrich"
May 2004
exNorthern Ontario
3^{3}×11^{2} Posts 
mfaktc v0.20's recent release brings GPUsieving into the game. And much increased performance (in the order of 3050%). TF levels for GPU72 may need to be reconsidered?
http://mersenne.ca/cudalucas.php?model=13&granularity=2 
20130108, 23:23  #1648  
Aug 2012
New Hampshire
2^{3}·101 Posts 
Quote:


20130108, 23:41  #1649  
P90 years forever!
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL
7,351 Posts 
Quote:


20130108, 23:41  #1650 
"James Heinrich"
May 2004
exNorthern Ontario
3^{3}·11^{2} Posts 
Starting at about 57M, I'd say that's true.
According to my chart: 46M56M = 2^{73} 57M72M = 2^{74} 73M90?M = 2^{75} Last fiddled with by James Heinrich on 20130108 at 23:45 Reason: can't count 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Status  Primeinator  Operation Billion Digits  5  20111206 02:35 
62 bit status  1997rj7  Lone Mersenne Hunters  27  20080929 13:52 
OBD Status  Uncwilly  Operation Billion Digits  22  20051025 14:05 
12M LLR status  paulunderwood  3*2^n1 Search  2  20050313 17:03 
Status of 26.0M  26.5M  1997rj7  Lone Mersenne Hunters  25  20040618 16:46 