mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Factoring

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2009-05-29, 05:54   #34
henryzz
Just call me Henry
 
henryzz's Avatar
 
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)

593810 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Batalov View Post
According to Greg (and me, I guess, from limited experience) - there should be hardly any difference. (Optimization of the C glue code is not significant, but the assembly code is common.)

These binaries run great on Core2 (I've run them myself, too - under ubuntu and the speed was great; but most of the time my that computer is in Windows mode for the kid's homework use) and on K8/K10 alike.
brilliant
i have completed a small factorization with them and was impressed by their speed
henryzz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-19, 23:56   #35
Joshua2
 
Joshua2's Avatar
 
Sep 2004

13·41 Posts
Default

so is there a windows x64 optimized siever for core2? can someone link me the best binary to use? is linux still much faster?

Last fiddled with by Joshua2 on 2010-01-19 at 23:57
Joshua2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-20, 00:25   #36
frmky
 
frmky's Avatar
 
Jul 2003
So Cal

1000101100002 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua2 View Post
so is there a windows x64 optimized siever for core2? can someone link me the best binary to use? is linux still much faster?
No. I'm not an ASM guy, but I'm told calling conventions are different and a lot of ASM would need significant modification. The speedy 64-bit code is Linux only right now.
frmky is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-20, 01:21   #37
Jeff Gilchrist
 
Jeff Gilchrist's Avatar
 
Jun 2003
Ottawa, Canada

3×17×23 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Joshua2 View Post
so is there a windows x64 optimized siever for core2? can someone link me the best binary to use? is linux still much faster?
You could always get Virtual Box, install 64bit Linux and run that inside Windows to sieve.

Jeff.
Jeff Gilchrist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-20, 10:46   #38
cjohnsto
 
Jun 2005

3×5 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by frmky View Post
No. I'm not an ASM guy, but I'm told calling conventions are different and a lot of ASM would need significant modification. The speedy 64-bit code is Linux only right now.
The calling conventions are quite different, however most of the time it is pretty trivial to convert between the two conventions. I have found the interesting differences in the conventions don't apply that often.

In the past I have used a simple ifdef in my assembler at the start and end of the function to convert the input and results.
This method works well if there is one function that takes most of the computation time.
cjohnsto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-20, 13:28   #39
Jeff Gilchrist
 
Jeff Gilchrist's Avatar
 
Jun 2003
Ottawa, Canada

3×17×23 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cjohnsto View Post
The calling conventions are quite different, however most of the time it is pretty trivial to convert between the two conventions. I have found the interesting differences in the conventions don't apply that often.
Does that mean you are volunteering to convert the code to work in Windows then?
Jeff Gilchrist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-23, 05:22   #40
cjohnsto
 
Jun 2005

F16 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeff Gilchrist View Post
Does that mean you are volunteering to convert the code to work in Windows then?
If you point me at a copy of the code with some build instructions for Windows I can take a look.
cjohnsto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-01-24, 11:03   #41
Jeff Gilchrist
 
Jeff Gilchrist's Avatar
 
Jun 2003
Ottawa, Canada

49516 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cjohnsto View Post
If you point me at a copy of the code with some build instructions for Windows I can take a look.
The main source tree is in SVN trunk here:
http://ggnfs.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/ggnfs/

The experimental 64bit sieving code you would need to translate is here:
http://ggnfs.svn.sourceforge.net/vie...l/lasieve4_64/

The windows VS2008 project and code is here:
http://ggnfs.svn.sourceforge.net/vie.../build.vc/vc9/

Specially load ggnfs.sln and build the solutions to get the regular 64bit code compiled, you would have to add a new project for your translated 64bit sieving code.
Jeff Gilchrist is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-02-11, 02:58   #42
cjohnsto
 
Jun 2005

3·5 Posts
Default

I haven't disappeared. I'm having trouble with getting GMP to build for Windows.
I'm thinking I might just do the conversions blind (without building/testing) and pass them back to for someone to build, test and make small fixes.
cjohnsto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-02-11, 07:27   #43
ltd
 
ltd's Avatar
 
Apr 2003

22×193 Posts
Default

Instead of GMP you can use the mpir package.

http://www.mpir.org/

This comes also with Visual Studio solutions.

Last fiddled with by ltd on 2010-02-11 at 07:28
ltd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-02-16, 18:38   #44
chris2be8
 
chris2be8's Avatar
 
Sep 2009

219810 Posts
Default

Having finally got the experimental version to run on one of my systems I've benchmarked it against the C version.

64 bit assembler version yielded 340020 relations in 01:02:31
The C version yielded 340026 relations in 01:54:17

ie 1.828 times as fast. Nice.

Both with the following poly sieved from q=2750000 to q=2850000
Code:
n: 15200438395829673822887270747334456300081381814070181365670614122000527807575298698572727198863263298646427259781616606952751
skew: 149765.83
# norm 3.27e+17
c5: 34200
c4: -47685613354
c3: 173727493738605
c2: 708460243134031910960
c1: -19147218280457427952169760
c0: -2082763077173939661276956379976
# alpha -6.97
Y1: 13931002448209
Y0: -850291789984003411307205
# Murphy_E 1.61e-10
# M 10722983998325608485314324921895133003712347944750948590020548179373615865209960488935822420329521367862576842656966919610242
type: gnfs
rlim: 5500000
alim: 5500000
lpbr: 27
lpba: 27
mfbr: 53
mfba: 53
rlambda: 2.5
alambda: 2.5
qintsize: 100000
Has anyone any suggestions as to what to change polySelTimeMultiplier to? At the default it spends too long searching for polynomials related to the now shortened sieving time. But what should I reduce it by?

Chris K
chris2be8 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
3,697+ (GNFS 220.9) pinhodecarlos NFS@Home 0 2014-12-24 19:13
3,766+ (GNFS 215.5) pinhodecarlos NFS@Home 34 2014-04-01 21:27
Nonstandard lasieve binaries fivemack Factoring 8 2010-04-27 18:59
Bug in 64-bit lasieve Shaopu Lin Factoring 3 2009-11-18 18:42
c97 GNFS not possible? Andi47 Msieve 5 2009-01-26 18:19

All times are UTC. The time now is 08:25.


Sun Dec 5 08:25:50 UTC 2021 up 135 days, 2:54, 0 users, load averages: 1.47, 1.64, 1.59

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.