mersenneforum.org  

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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2014-02-08, 09:12   #67
Cruelty
 
Cruelty's Avatar
 
May 2005

2×809 Posts
Default

You guys are really fast I see. It's a pity though that there was no prime nor other PRP in the 2M-3.5M range :surprised

Since I cannot effectively compete with you, I cancel my 5M-6M reservation. Good luck!
Cruelty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-02-25, 04:03   #68
Citrix
 
Citrix's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

2×33×29 Posts
Default

So I have sieved everything up to 55-bits. When I do the LLR testing it is using AVX-all complex FFTs.

Am I doing something wrong. Shouldn't the LLR be faster (and use smaller AVX length) as everything is done modulo 2^4P+1.
Citrix is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-02-25, 09:37   #69
Cruelty
 
Cruelty's Avatar
 
May 2005

2×809 Posts
Default

All technicalities aside, using LLR to search for Gaussian Mersenne Norms and Co-norms always took more time than standard k*b^n+c tests. On the other hand LLR still should be faster than PFGW in that area
Cruelty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-02-25, 16:03   #70
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

237816 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Citrix View Post
So I have sieved everything up to 55-bits. When I do the LLR testing it is using AVX-all complex FFTs.

Am I doing something wrong. Shouldn't the LLR be faster (and use smaller AVX length) as everything is done modulo 2^4P+1.
2^2P+1, actually.

1. 55-bits is too low (one should sieve until the removal rate is comparable to running real tests. ~58-59 bits is more like it - and that's for the low range).
2. (on an average bench machine) From 3.5 to 3.85M, iterations take 4.7ms; from 3.85M to >4.5M, iterations take 6.3ms, then higher still (I haven't benchmarked, you can do it yourself).
3. Take the values left in the sieve, and estimate the necessary time already. It is easy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Citrix View Post
Am I doing something wrong.
Well, ...
You haven't still done the time estimate, for one thing. You haven't sieved well enough, for another. Your grasp exceeds your reach, but according to Browning, this is not necessarily wrong - or else, what's heaven for.
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-02-26, 02:29   #71
Citrix
 
Citrix's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

2×33×29 Posts
Default

My question was regarding the AVX all complex FFT? Is LLR choosing the right FFT type? Is there some setting I am getting wrong. Shouldn't mod 4^p+1 be faster than all-complex FFT?

In terms of the sieving question:- 55 bits is right depth for me. Given the number of 32 bit computer available and on my 64 bit computer it takes about 4 ms per iteration-- 55-56 bit seems the correct number for me. If some how we could get a GPU to sieve then maybe 62 bits would be the right number. I have tried sieving upto 60 bits for the 3.5-3.6M range.

There are 67499 numbers left. With 1 computer it will take ~2000 days. with 2 computers ~1000 days. I might be able to put more computers on this range (I am trying to get PRPnet to work). So definately less than 10 years. I might unreserve 4M-5M, if I am unable to put more computers, so everything will be done in 1 year. I will let you know.

Searching for primes is a hobby and not my profession. Batalov, I am not sure why you keep on pressurizing me to finish this range? There are plently of riesel k that members of riesel prime search have reserved and they are slowly making progress on them- even if it takes them more than a year to do a 0.25 M range. No one is pressurizing them. Do you rather want to do the whole range yourself than having me compute it? I don't understand your attitude towards me? Please let me know.
Citrix is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-02-26, 09:14   #72
Cruelty
 
Cruelty's Avatar
 
May 2005

31228 Posts
Default

I've started my GM/GQ effort almost 8 years ago and from ~1M I have arrived almost @ 2M. Up until recently I was reserving 0.05M ranges and it took me some time to finish each of those on a single C2Q core. Right now all that changed in light of recent increase of interest and computing power dedicated to that effort, therefore I would suggest to limit reservation ranges. So how much should one reserve at a time? Since apparently only 3 of us are particularly interested in that subject, I think we can come to some decisions quite fast
I propose that one should not reserve more than one month worth of work, and for the sake of tracking progress, report status at least once a month in this thread.
Current status looks as follows:
Code:
till 600k - completed by Jean Penné (GQ-only effort)
600k - 700k - completed by Cruelty (GQ-only effort)
700k - GM36 - available (GQ-only effort)
GM36 - 1.95M - completed by Cruelty (2 GMs + 5 GQs found)
1.95M - 2M - reserved by Cruelty (currently @ 1.98M)
2M - 3.5M - completed by Batalov (1 GQ found)
3.5M - 5M - reserved by Citrix (prefactored to 55 bits)
I can also volunteer to set-up a results repository. Additionally together we can come up with an idea how to set up a PRPnet server to serve us all, and avoid all that reservation hassle altogether?
What do you think?

Last fiddled with by Cruelty on 2014-02-26 at 09:20
Cruelty is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-02-26, 17:36   #73
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

23·5·227 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cruelty View Post
I propose that one should not reserve more than one month worth of work, and for the sake of tracking progress, report status at least once a month in this thread.
This is consistent with what most other projects are doing and sounds just right to me.
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-02-27, 07:25   #74
Citrix
 
Citrix's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

61E16 Posts
Default

I have already divided the ranges from 3.5-3.85M among the 2 computers. I will unreserve 3.85M-5M. I will update results once a month.

Is anyone else interested in finishing the 700k - GM36 - available (GQ-only effort) range?
Citrix is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-02-27, 15:24   #75
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2

215708 Posts
Default

I'll run the start of the slow range 3.85M-4.00M.
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-02-27, 16:41   #76
Thomas11
 
Thomas11's Avatar
 
Feb 2003

3·5·127 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Citrix View Post
Is anyone else interested in finishing the 700k - GM36 - available (GQ-only effort) range?
I just had a look into the "gmfcandidates.txt" file posted by Cruelty back in 2007. The range from 700k to GM36 accounts for 19197 tests. Quite a lot...

Is there a newer version of this file (perhaps containing less candidates)?

And what would be the right procedure and proper switches for LLR to tests those numbers? You mentioned "TestGQ=1" and "FactorOverride", but I may be missing some crucial information. And does one need the 32bit version of LLR?
Thomas11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2014-02-28, 08:47   #77
Thomas11
 
Thomas11's Avatar
 
Feb 2003

3·5·127 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Thomas11 View Post
And what would be the right procedure and proper switches for LLR to tests those numbers? You mentioned "TestGQ=1" and "FactorOverride", but I may be missing some crucial information. And does one need the 32bit version of LLR?
Meanwhile I did some factoring tests using the 32 bit version of LLR. Using just "FacTo=45" already eliminates almost half of the candidates. And I learned it the hard way that I need to turn of GM testing using "TestGM=0", otherwise LLR reports and eliminates only those candidates which have factors on both sides.

I will continue factoring and do some initial primality tests and decide later whether I can cope with the whole range 700k-GM36 in reasonable time. If not, I will take at least a small section...
Thomas11 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
New PC dedicated to Mersenne Prime Search Taiy Hardware 12 2018-01-02 15:54
Gaussian integers- use of norms devarajkandadai Number Theory Discussion Group 11 2017-10-28 20:58
Low clock speeds on Mersenne Prime search Ammonia Hardware 2 2016-01-21 17:46
Testing Mersenne cofactors for primality? CRGreathouse Computer Science & Computational Number Theory 18 2013-06-08 19:12
Can I specify the range to search the Mersenne Prime? Unregistered Information & Answers 22 2012-03-20 11:38

All times are UTC. The time now is 03:54.

Fri Aug 7 03:54:18 UTC 2020 up 20 days, 23:41, 1 user, load averages: 1.84, 1.50, 1.49

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, 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.