mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Prime Search Projects > Riesel Prime Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2007-11-26, 17:42   #45
gd_barnes
 
gd_barnes's Avatar
 
May 2007
Kansas; USA

101000010001102 Posts
Default

Kosmaj,

The double-check effort that you requested for k=213, 237, 249, 261, 267, 273, 279, & 291 has finished sieving and started LLRing 2-3 days ago. It has completed n=100K-160K so far. No problems yet.

The next status will be when I'm done (3-4 weeks) or earlier if I find a problem.


Gary
gd_barnes is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-11-29, 14:00   #46
kar_bon
 
kar_bon's Avatar
 
Mar 2006
Germany

287810 Posts
Default

the Prime Search pages has been extended for all k<255 downto k=3!
perhaps another doublecheck effort when they in higher ranges, mostly for the new k's at n=140.000.
karsten
kar_bon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-12-02, 07:07   #47
Kosmaj
 
Kosmaj's Avatar
 
Nov 2003

2·1,811 Posts
Default k=285

I tested all gaps of k=285 marked on the Keller's page:
135-145, 155-170 (I did 135-173 including 145-155), and 230-260. I confirmed 3 primes in the 145-160 range but to my amazement I found two new primes
285 161183
285 163071

They were not supposed to be there because the range was tested by somebody from the 15k project (I don't know who because Joss didn't leave any records) and by a guy called Footmaster from the PrimeSearch project but they either used one of early, faulty versions of LLR or they just didn't report them. Anyway, k=285 is now complete to 808k without any gaps.

I'm now working on the 100-200k gap of k=181, and currently I'm at 150k, no surprises here so far, I confirmed two primes at 132 and 133k.

All primes mentioned above are listed on our k<300 stats page.
Kosmaj is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-12-08, 10:24   #48
em99010pepe
 
em99010pepe's Avatar
 
Sep 2004

2·5·283 Posts
Default

I have a question. I notice my quad-core with the stock fan was getting too damm hot so I decided the clean the dust. Temperatures went down by 20ºC. My problem, maybe not a problem, is that my last three primes were found with the default core between 70-80 ºC. Do I need to double-check all my ranges? I know from Ars forum that temps can go high as 90 ºC with super coolers and with the cpu overclocked. Comments please.

Carlos
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	y1pu47nLJXiJqLg8xC3Y3_seS7779s01tnjHHuou3o0x93o_YK9CO_PNlv1S_pGvvXE87uJYXYAOz0.jpg
Views:	109
Size:	66.6 KB
ID:	2047  

Last fiddled with by em99010pepe on 2007-12-08 at 10:25
em99010pepe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-12-08, 11:32   #49
em99010pepe
 
em99010pepe's Avatar
 
Sep 2004

2·5·283 Posts
Default

Having bad results would be only with half of the 105 ranges, two 5th ranges, and two ranges from 125, where the primes were found! I think it's not necessary to double-check but of course I'll wait for the answer of the experts.
em99010pepe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-12-08, 17:10   #50
mdettweiler
A Sunny Moo
 
mdettweiler's Avatar
 
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)

186916 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by em99010pepe View Post
Having bad results would be only with half of the 105 ranges, two 5th ranges, and two ranges from 125, where the primes were found! I think it's not necessary to double-check but of course I'll wait for the answer of the experts.
Although I am by no means an expert on this, I would guess that the ranges for which the primes were found in are probably good--since all primes submitted to the Prime Pages are automatically re-checked.

A while ago I'd had some problems with LLR crashing, and when I cleaned out my case, it fixed the problem of LLR crashing, as well as giving me a nice speed boost (more than 2x). From what I can tell, though, I wasn't producing bad residuals anywhere in there--during part of the time while I had the LLR-crashing problem, I was still running some PrimeGrid LLR-TPS workunits through BOINC; 50% of their LLR-TPS workunits are set with a quorum of 2 (i.e. they are automatically doublechecked), and I wasn't getting any validate errors, so thus I'm guessing that I most likely didn't produce any bad residuals. As for your quadcore, considering that everything is still running stably (I'm assuming that it is), most likely your residuals were fine, just that maybe your system wasn't running at top speed (as I mentioned before, mine got a big speed boost when I cleaned it out).

Just my $0.02.
mdettweiler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-12-08, 17:32   #51
em99010pepe
 
em99010pepe's Avatar
 
Sep 2004

2·5·283 Posts
Default

Didn't get a speed boost...the machine didn't crash...everything very stable...I am impressed.
em99010pepe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-12-08, 19:48   #52
AES
 
Jul 2007
Tennessee

60810 Posts
Default

Carlos,

I found this data from Intel (on tomshardware.com) regarding acceptable temp ranges based on the core stepping the quad uses.

http://mersenneforum.org/showpost.ph...7&postcount=10
AES is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-12-08, 21:01   #53
em99010pepe
 
em99010pepe's Avatar
 
Sep 2004

1011000011102 Posts
Default

Thanks, now it's running super cool. Core 0 at 55ºC and the rest at 49ºC at full load. Also I'm waiting for a new cooler.
em99010pepe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-12-09, 18:04   #54
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

2·2,339 Posts
Default

Anon is right- all primes submitted to top-5000 are double-checked, so you have the reassurance that all your primes were confirmed as a substitute for double-checking.

The Core2 architecture has a LOT of headroom built-in. 70C temps should present no problems at stock speeds; of course, cleaning out the dust often makes everything more reliable.

The stock cooler is plenty for non-overclocked machines. A larger cooler will also collect dust, and need cleaning only slightly less often than your old one.
-Curtis
VBCurtis is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2007-12-20, 01:36   #55
gd_barnes
 
gd_barnes's Avatar
 
May 2007
Kansas; USA

2·5·1,031 Posts
Default double-check for 8 k's 213<=k<=291 complete

Kosmaj,

The double-check effort that you requested for k=213, 237, 249, 261, 267, 273, 279, & 291 has completed. No problems were found.

Ranges will be reported to Wilfred Keller.


Gary
gd_barnes is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Double checking of Results pinhodecarlos Prime Gap Searches 13 2017-12-09 06:07
What about double-checking TF/P-1? 137ben PrimeNet 6 2012-03-13 04:01
Double checking Unregistered Information & Answers 19 2011-07-29 09:57
Double-checking milestone? jobhoti Math 17 2004-05-21 05:02
Any glory in double checking? Quacky Lounge 5 2003-12-03 02:20

All times are UTC. The time now is 03:37.

Sun Mar 7 03:37:37 UTC 2021 up 93 days, 23:48, 0 users, load averages: 1.72, 1.81, 1.68

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum has received and complied with 0 (zero) government requests for information.

Permission is granted to copy, distribute and/or modify this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation.
A copy of the license is included in the FAQ.