20090110, 18:50  #12  
6809 > 6502
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts
5×7×311 Posts 
Quote:
I had it set to try and find a factor (supposing that there may be one) as soon as possible. Doing the 1/62 and 1/63 chance at the same time, then starting the next most likely etc. This was how I would do it, YMMV. 

20090110, 22:31  #13  
Jun 2003
7×167 Posts 
Quote:
These two spaces overlap; some factors could be found using either method. But we do P1 because it is capable of finding some factors well beyond the reach of TF. So far, I have found two prime factors >100 bits  by no means a record for GIMPS  although most are just a few bits beyond the amount of TF done. Quote:


20090111, 00:38  #14  
"Oliver"
Mar 2005
Germany
2×557 Posts 
Quote:


20090111, 10:11  #15  
Jun 2003
1169_{10} Posts 
Quote:
Even if you had such a list, I don't think the method used to obtain them was recorded by V4. V5 may do so, but this information is not exposed on the website. Any factor larger than the TF limit is likely to have been found by P1 if the exponent is greater than 10,000. Below that level, factors may have also been obtained by ECM. Intractable Mersennes below about 1,000 bits have been factored using the Special Number Field Sieve method. That very specialized and computationintensive method is beyond the scope of GIMPS One way to gain confidence that a particular factor was obtained by P1 is to determine the limits to which it is smooth. If those limits are within the normal bounds for a P1 test on an exponent of that size, then it was most likely found this way, else not. This is not a definitive test, though. A factor which could have been found with P1 may in fact have been found by some other method, while the P1 method does occasionally throw up nonsmooth factors. Here is a list of the largest factors ever found using the P1 method. None of these are factors of Mersenne numbers, and I don't believe that any were found by GIMPS. See also this thread. 

20090111, 10:16  #16  
Jun 2003
7×167 Posts 
Quote:


20090111, 14:16  #17 
Jun 2003
2221_{8} Posts 

20090112, 02:16  #18  
1976 Toyota Corona years forever!
"Wayne"
Nov 2006
Saskatchewan, Canada
5^{2}×211 Posts 
Quote:
Code:
FFT 1core All4 Inc. 1536 0.030 0.038 22% (Two cores with these) 2048 0.041 0.051 24% P1 0.076 0.121 60% (ouch) P1 is Phase 2 of a 50M exponent with 1200M RAM Last fiddled with by petrw1 on 20090112 at 02:18 

20090112, 12:56  #19 
Jan 2009
Norfolk, Virginia USA
100_{2} Posts 
I am a new member and just built custom i940. NOT an expert in PCs or Math but know enough to be dangerous ( mostly to myself..lol) Anyway, I was struck curious at the P1 completion times for stage 1 & 2 so I thought I would post my first run (started 0400 11Jan) using 1 worker, 1cpu, 2Gb mem. Stage 1= 11.37 hrs Stage 2= 16.56 hrs. (calculated)
Also I really want to adjust my workers to the optimum so I invite advice on my present setup:(all runs 24 hours) Cpu1= P1 L Cpu2= default(TF) Cpu3= TF LMH Cpu4= default(TF) 1st 45 hours stats TF694215819.1427170Overall1627267019.1427170 avg loads: C080%/80% C180%/20% C260%/40% C360%/40% cheers 
20090113, 17:28  #20  
1976 Toyota Corona years forever!
"Wayne"
Nov 2006
Saskatchewan, Canada
5^{2}·211 Posts 
Quote:
Was that P1 time with all 4 cores busy? I could match that time if the P1 core was running alone but it is 50% faster than my Q9550 P1 time running P1 on 1 core and LL and the other 3. I'm confused by the huge numbers you have for your 45 hours stats. Your numbers are MUCH!!! higher than the combined total thruput of the entire project over the last 12 years. 

20090113, 17:56  #21 
Jan 2009
Norfolk, Virginia USA
2^{2} Posts 
here is my 24/7 settings:
Gimp: Core0: P1, C1: TF, C2: TF(LMH), C3: TF Rig: i940 2.9Ghz, ASUS P6T DLX, 3GB Corsair ddr3 1066(2 allocated to GIMPS), 2 'raptorsRaid 0, 5Gb DSL. Account created20090110 13:04 UTC TypeRankofGHz daysCountTF586218127.4329910P1107616254.12221Overall1576270031.5551911 
20090113, 19:53  #22 
1976 Toyota Corona years forever!
"Wayne"
Nov 2006
Saskatchewan, Canada
5^{2}·211 Posts 

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
News from subproject Deep Sieving  Batalov  Operazione Doppi Mersennes  65  20220112 12:53 
Deep Sieving MM49 in parallel  ET_  Operazione Doppi Mersennes  22  20160728 11:23 
What does Glib Deepak have to do with deep doodoo?  cheesehead  Science & Technology  47  20141214 13:45 
Deep Hash  diep  Math  5  20121005 17:44 
NASA's Deep Impact...  ixfd64  Lounge  5  20050706 13:46 