Prime95 version 29.4 - Page 19

Prime95 · 2018-01-21, 20:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by MisterBitcoin

Not sure if it fits in here, but is it possible to run p-1 for a number like that: 10^75005*8-7?
How would the worktodo look like, if it works?

Try Pminus1=8,10,75005,-1,B1,B2 where B1 and B2 are the P-1 bounds you want to try.

MisterBitcoin · 2018-01-21, 20:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prime95

Try Pminus1=8,10,75005,-1,B1,B2 where B1 and B2 are the P-1 bounds you want to try.

Thanks. That worked well. I need some time, but pepi was there to help me.

ixfd64 · 2018-02-01, 17:36

This is probably a stupid question, but is the current version of Prime95 still limited to 64 threads?

Prime95 · 2018-02-01, 18:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by ixfd64

This is probably a stupid question, but is the current version of Prime95 still limited to 64 threads?

I think the limit was increased to 512 or 1024.

ixfd64 · 2018-02-01, 23:23

That's pretty awesome.

This reminds me: now that there are much more users with access to many-core systems, are there any plans to make the UI less clunky when the user is running a large number of worker windows?

Here's an example of a user running 64 threads: http://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=16865

Therefore, I have two suggestions:

Make the status window scrollable so that it doesn't stretch off the screen.
Make the main MDI scrollable so that the worker windows aren't squished together.

Would these be very hard to implement?

Prime95 · 2018-02-09, 22:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by ixfd64

Therefore, I have two suggestions:

Make the status window scrollable so that it doesn't stretch off the screen.
Make the main MDI scrollable so that the worker windows aren't squished together.

Would these be very hard to implement?

I have no idea. I've barely touched the Windows UI code in a decade. I've added it to my to-do list for the next release.

Prime95 · 2018-02-09, 23:03

Build 8 now available for download from ftp://mersenne.org/gimps. Windows and Linux 64-bit only.

Two changes (compare to build 7):

1) Fixes bug where autobench interrupts a torture test.
2) Linked with hwloc 1.11.9. Fixes a crash bug on a new unreleased CPU.

ixfd64 · 2018-02-20, 06:25

I've noticed that my results.txt file for some computers contain seemingly random benchmark information.

Quote:

[Wed Jan 24 18:02:03 2018]
FFTlen=4608K, Type=3, Arch=4, Pass1=384, Pass2=12288, clm=4 (2 cores, 2 workers): 78.46, 79.98 ms. Throughput: 25.25 iter/sec.
FFTlen=4608K, Type=3, Arch=4, Pass1=384, Pass2=12288, clm=2 (2 cores, 2 workers): 48.23, 47.87 ms. Throughput: 41.62 iter/sec.
FFTlen=4608K, Type=3, Arch=4, Pass1=384, Pass2=12288, clm=1 (2 cores, 2 workers): 44.51, 41.41 ms. Throughput: 46.61 iter/sec.
FFTlen=4608K, Type=3, Arch=4, Pass1=512, Pass2=9216, clm=4 (2 cores, 2 workers): 42.91, 41.93 ms. Throughput: 47.15 iter/sec.
FFTlen=4608K, Type=3, Arch=4, Pass1=512, Pass2=9216, clm=2 (2 cores, 2 workers): 41.96, 41.84 ms. Throughput: 47.73 iter/sec.
FFTlen=4608K, Type=3, Arch=4, Pass1=512, Pass2=9216, clm=1 (2 cores, 2 workers): 42.82, 41.41 ms. Throughput: 47.50 iter/sec.
FFTlen=4608K, Type=3, Arch=4, Pass1=768, Pass2=6144, clm=4 (2 cores, 2 workers): 42.37, 40.14 ms. Throughput: 48.51 iter/sec.
FFTlen=4608K, Type=3, Arch=4, Pass1=768, Pass2=6144, clm=2 (2 cores, 2 workers): 40.12, 39.99 ms. Throughput: 49.94 iter/sec.
FFTlen=4608K, Type=3, Arch=4, Pass1=768, Pass2=6144, clm=1 (2 cores, 2 workers): 41.02, 39.69 ms. Throughput: 49.58 iter/sec.
FFTlen=4608K, Type=3, Arch=4, Pass1=1024, Pass2=4608, clm=4 (2 cores, 2 workers): 43.23, 41.00 ms. Throughput: 47.52 iter/sec.
FFTlen=4608K, Type=3, Arch=4, Pass1=1024, Pass2=4608, clm=2 (2 cores, 2 workers): 40.03, 38.45 ms. Throughput: 50.99 iter/sec.
FFTlen=4608K, Type=3, Arch=4, Pass1=1024, Pass2=4608, clm=1 (2 cores, 2 workers): 39.70, 39.33 ms. Throughput: 50.62 iter/sec.
FFTlen=4608K, Type=3, Arch=4, Pass1=1536, Pass2=3072, clm=4 (2 cores, 2 workers): 43.69, 41.30 ms. Throughput: 47.10 iter/sec.
FFTlen=4608K, Type=3, Arch=4, Pass1=1536, Pass2=3072, clm=2 (2 cores, 2 workers): 41.07, 38.47 ms. Throughput: 50.34 iter/sec.
FFTlen=4608K, Type=3, Arch=4, Pass1=1536, Pass2=3072, clm=1 (2 cores, 2 workers): 58.20, 52.47 ms. Throughput: 36.24 iter/sec.
FFTlen=4608K, Type=3, Arch=4, Pass1=2048, Pass2=2304, clm=4 (2 cores, 2 workers): 94.20, 88.56 ms. Throughput: 21.91 iter/sec.
FFTlen=4608K, Type=3, Arch=4, Pass1=2048, Pass2=2304, clm=2 (2 cores, 2 workers): 66.01, 63.22 ms. Throughput: 30.97 iter/sec.
FFTlen=4608K, Type=3, Arch=4, Pass1=2048, Pass2=2304, clm=1 (2 cores, 2 workers): 43.09, 41.50 ms. Throughput: 47.31 iter/sec.

If these are the automatic benchmarks introduced two versions ago, then shouldn't they be written to gwnum.txt instead?

Prime95 · 2018-02-20, 06:31

gwum.txt contains a highly encoded version of the same data

ixfd64 · 2018-02-20, 06:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prime95

gwum.txt contains a highly encoded version of the same data

That makes sense. Thanks.

Falkentyne · 2018-03-03, 20:07

Hello, I have been unable to get AVX2 support to work in the latest prime95 or even earlier versions. Defaults to FMA3. Disabling FMA3 makes it revert to AVX. Disabling AVX makes it use old traditional FFTs like core2, pentium4, etc. However I have been unable to get AVX2 to work directly. The switch CPUSupportsAVX2=1 does nothing. It's either FMA3, AVX, or traditional.

Using 7820HK CPU on a MSI Throttlebook ;)
Windows 10 Enterprise.

Any ideas? (HWinfo64 shows full AVX2 support).

Stress testing only.

2018-02-01, 23:23	#203
ixfd64 Bemusing Prompter "Danny" Dec 2002 California 100101001001₂ Posts	That's pretty awesome. This reminds me: now that there are much more users with access to many-core systems, are there any plans to make the UI less clunky when the user is running a large number of worker windows? Here's an example of a user running 64 threads: http://mersenneforum.org/showthread.php?t=16865 Therefore, I have two suggestions: Make the status window scrollable so that it doesn't stretch off the screen. Make the main MDI scrollable so that the worker windows aren't squished together. Would these be very hard to implement? Last fiddled with by ixfd64 on 2018-02-01 at 23:24

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Prime95 version 27.3	Prime95	Software	148	2012-03-18 19:24
Prime95 version 26.3	Prime95	Software	76	2010-12-11 00:11
Prime95 version 25.5	Prime95	PrimeNet	369	2008-02-26 05:21
Prime95 version 25.4	Prime95	PrimeNet	143	2007-09-24 21:01
When the next prime95 version ?	pacionet	Software	74	2006-12-07 20:30

2018-02-01, 17:36	#201
ixfd64 Bemusing Prompter "Danny" Dec 2002 California 2377₁₀ Posts	This is probably a stupid question, but is the current version of Prime95 still limited to 64 threads?

2018-02-09, 23:03	#205
Prime95 P90 years forever! Aug 2002 Yeehaw, FL 7,411 Posts	Build 8 now available for download from ftp://mersenne.org/gimps. Windows and Linux 64-bit only. Two changes (compare to build 7): 1) Fixes bug where autobench interrupts a torture test. 2) Linked with hwloc 1.11.9. Fixes a crash bug on a new unreleased CPU.

2018-02-20, 06:31	#207
Prime95 P90 years forever! Aug 2002 Yeehaw, FL 7,411 Posts	gwum.txt contains a highly encoded version of the same data

2018-03-03, 20:07	#209
Falkentyne Mar 2011 2·7 Posts	Hello, I have been unable to get AVX2 support to work in the latest prime95 or even earlier versions. Defaults to FMA3. Disabling FMA3 makes it revert to AVX. Disabling AVX makes it use old traditional FFTs like core2, pentium4, etc. However I have been unable to get AVX2 to work directly. The switch CPUSupportsAVX2=1 does nothing. It's either FMA3, AVX, or traditional. Using 7820HK CPU on a MSI Throttlebook ;) Windows 10 Enterprise. Any ideas? (HWinfo64 shows full AVX2 support). Stress testing only.