mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search > Data

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2017-07-27, 05:06   #12
petrw1
1976 Toyota Corona years forever!
 
petrw1's Avatar
 
"Wayne"
Nov 2006
Saskatchewan, Canada

3×1,423 Posts
Default

I think I'll start somewhere in this range....some day soon.
This is the current DC range so it can help there too.

Code:
100K  ToGo	2^N
40.0	2059	72
40.1	2116	72
40.2	2046	72
40.3	2096	72
40.4	2032	72
40.5	2077	72
40.6	2023	72
40.7	2033	72
40.8	2066	72
40.9	2004	72
41.0	2063	72
41.1	2093	72
41.2	2012	72
41.3	2041	72
41.5	2035	72
41.6	2049	72
41.7	2099	72
41.8	2051	72
41.9	2047	72
42.0	2021	72
42.1	2017	72
42.2	2014	72
42.3	2045	72
42.4	2022	72
42.5	2003	72
42.6	2129	72
42.7	2035	72
42.8	2015	72
42.9	2067	72
43.0	2133	72
43.1	2046	72
43.2	2064	72
43.3	2097	72
43.4	2102	72
43.6	2021	72
43.7	2025	72
43.8	2049	72
43.9	2028	72
44.0	2017	72
44.1	2012	72
44.2	2024	72
44.6	2098	72
44.7	2060	72
44.8	2009	72
44.9	2034	72
45.0	2015	72
45.2	2046	72
45.3	2090	72
45.4	2014	72
45.5	2096	72
45.6	2024	72
45.7	2031	72
45.8	2093	72
46.0	2042	72
46.1	2005	72
46.2	2028	72
46.3	2097	72
46.5	2061	72
46.6	2054	72
46.7	2044	72
46.8	2030	72
47.0	2025	72
47.1	2060	72
47.2	2038	72
47.5	2065	72
47.6	2019	72
47.7	2046	72
47.8	2074	72
48.0	2028	72
48.1	2026	72
48.2	2053	72
48.3	2035	72
48.4	2113	72
48.6	2030	72
48.7	2029	72
48.9	2023	72
49.1	2004	72
49.3	2049	72
49.4	2081	72
49.5	2056	72
49.6	2121	72
49.8	2072	72
49.9	2008	72
50.2	2053	73
50.3	2034	73
50.4	2019	73
50.6	2005	73
50.8	2012	73
50.9	2017	73
51.3	2000	73
51.7	2004	73
52.2	2003	73
52.3	2057	73
52.4	2005	73
52.9	2045	73
53.2	2034	73
53.3	2002	73
53.5	2029	73
53.9	2053	73
54.0	2018	73
54.2	2019	73
54.6	2009	73
55.0	2009	73
55.4	2011	73
55.6	2016	73
55.9	2011	73
56.0	2002	73
56.1	2010	73
56.3	2032	73
56.5	2032	73
56.6	2043	73
56.7	2027	73
56.8	2061	73
57.4	2009	73
57.6	2030	73
57.7	2008	73
57.8	2004	73
58.1	2032	73
58.7	2067	73
58.8	2019	73
59.4	2065	73
59.6	2031	73
59.9	2004	73
A lot of these will have poor P-1; might be more efficient to start there?

Last fiddled with by petrw1 on 2017-07-27 at 05:42 Reason: Last line
petrw1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-08-31, 02:54   #13
petrw1
1976 Toyota Corona years forever!
 
petrw1's Avatar
 
"Wayne"
Nov 2006
Saskatchewan, Canada

10AD16 Posts
Default So here's my plan....

I will be starting my little pet project within the next week with 2 GPUs and adding about 30 Cores a few weeks later.

I'll be working in the extremes ranges.
The bigger horses in the 40M and 50M ranges.
The side benefit is that this will reduce the number requiring DC.
The smaller ponies in the 2M range.

For the GPUs there are about 16,000 Assignments in the high 40's factored below the yellow bar: http://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/0/3/4000
I expect to find about 200 factors there.

For the faster cores with adequate RAM I will be P-1'ing exponents in that same range that were done with B1=B2. These seem to give better odds at finding a factor than doing P-1 where the B1 and B2 bounds were less than adequate.

I'll let a few slower cores dabble at the low end (2M) doing ECM.

=================

If anyone is intrigued you are more than welcome to join in.
Keep me posted so we don't step on each other's toes.

See the first post for the details on this little initiative.

Wayne

Last fiddled with by petrw1 on 2017-08-31 at 02:55
petrw1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-09-04, 14:55   #14
chalsall
If I May
 
chalsall's Avatar
 
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados

212058 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by petrw1 View Post
For the GPUs there are about 16,000 Assignments in the high 40's factored below the yellow bar: http://www.mersenne.ca/status/tf/0/0/3/4000 I expect to find about 200 factors there.

If anyone is intrigued you are more than welcome to join in. Keep me posted so we don't step on each other's toes.
After conferring with Wayne, I have re-enabled DCTF on GPU72 to take the candidates from 48.8M to 50M up to (at least) 73 bits (the optimal economic cross-over point for contemporary GPUs). This is to help avoid any "toes being stepped on".

If anyone is interested, the DCTF manual assignments page has been re-enabled, and the spiders (MISFIT et al) can simply ask for DCTF work again.
chalsall is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-09-07, 07:27   #15
tha
 
tha's Avatar
 
Dec 2002

2·389 Posts
Default

For what it is worth, if been redoing P-1 on exponents that had their P-1 done with B1=B2 (usually on machines with no spare memory to do the higher B2 level). Almost all of it in the 10M to 20M range. Mostly with B1=300000 and B2=6000000. About one in 38 candidates yields a new found factor on a previously unfactored exponent.
tha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-09-07, 15:02   #16
petrw1
1976 Toyota Corona years forever!
 
petrw1's Avatar
 
"Wayne"
Nov 2006
Saskatchewan, Canada

3·1,423 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tha View Post
For what it is worth, if been redoing P-1 on exponents that had their P-1 done with B1=B2 (usually on machines with no spare memory to do the higher B2 level). Almost all of it in the 10M to 20M range. Mostly with B1=300000 and B2=6000000. About one in 38 candidates yields a new found factor on a previously unfactored exponent.
Thanks....I'll note that and try not to step on your toes.

I realize my little sub-project is actually quite a massive undertaking that I couldn't dream of finishing in my lifetime.

But I understand that there are always people dabbling at factoring in these ranges:
- Some are doing TF in the 20M or 30M ranges; in fact most ranges.
- There is a steady stream of ECM in the 0M - 20M range.
- Others are doing P-1 here and there.

So we'll see where we are at end of 2018.

To compare: since the beginning of 2017 there have been 4,082 exponents newly factored under 60M.
- Over half of these in the 20-30M range.
- And another 30% under 10M

-W-

Last fiddled with by petrw1 on 2017-09-07 at 15:32 Reason: Last paragraph
petrw1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-09-07, 21:11   #17
tha
 
tha's Avatar
 
Dec 2002

30A16 Posts
Default

[QUOTE=petrw1;467318]Thanks....I'll note that and try not to step on your toes.

/QUOTE]

Oh, thanks, but I am not claiming any range, do go ahead.
tha is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-09-16, 22:21   #18
petrw1
1976 Toyota Corona years forever!
 
petrw1's Avatar
 
"Wayne"
Nov 2006
Saskatchewan, Canada

3·1,423 Posts
Default Almost 8 weeks later...an update.

698 (1.25%) exponents factored in the ranges of interest....0 - 59.9M

1 range cleared (now below 2,000): 22.2M
Several with significant progress.
petrw1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-09-16, 22:43   #19
Gordon
 
Gordon's Avatar
 
Nov 2008

7·71 Posts
Default

I am doing a lot of the TF in the under 10m block.

Have already done to 67 bits

3,5,6,7,8 & 9m to 67 bits. Someone else took 9m to 68 bits

2m is 2/3 the way to 67 bits. So about 100k'ish exponents so far.

Did quite a bit in the sub 1m range to lift them to 64 bits, but mfaktc doesn't work below 100k so would need to use the cpu - which is currently tied up doing the ecm stage 1's to keep the deep stage 2's going on M4007.
Gordon is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-09-16, 23:54   #20
GP2
 
GP2's Avatar
 
Sep 2003

257810 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon View Post
Did quite a bit in the sub 1m range to lift them to 64 bits, but mfaktc doesn't work below 100k so would need to use the cpu - which is currently tied up doing the ecm stage 1's to keep the deep stage 2's going on M4007.
Below 100k all exponents have already been ECM'd to t=30 (about 100 bits), so only about a 37% chance of finding a factor smaller than 100 bits. So TF to 64 bits would have a very very low probability of finding any new factors.

Below 656k all exponents have already been ECM'd to t=25 (about 83 bits). Poor prospects for finding factors of 64 bits or smaller.

The above is for all exponents, including the ones that already have at least one known factor.

If we consider only exponents with no known factors, then everything below 1M has already been ECM'd to t=25.


Edit: also user TJAOI has covered everything up to 64 bits.

Last fiddled with by GP2 on 2017-09-17 at 00:07 Reason: user TJAOI
GP2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-09-17, 04:05   #21
petrw1
1976 Toyota Corona years forever!
 
petrw1's Avatar
 
"Wayne"
Nov 2006
Saskatchewan, Canada

102558 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by GP2 View Post
... everything below 1M has already been ECM'd to t=25. ...
Good to know...however.

The lowest range of interest to my little subproject (getting all 100K ranges below 2,000 unfactored) is 1.8M
petrw1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2017-09-17, 04:59   #22
petrw1
1976 Toyota Corona years forever!
 
petrw1's Avatar
 
"Wayne"
Nov 2006
Saskatchewan, Canada

102558 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gordon View Post
I am doing a lot of the TF in the under 10m block.

Have already done to 67 bits

3,5,6,7,8 & 9m to 67 bits. Someone else took 9m to 68 bits

2m is 2/3 the way to 67 bits. So about 100k'ish exponents so far.

Did quite a bit in the sub 1m range to lift them to 64 bits, but mfaktc doesn't work below 100k so would need to use the cpu - which is currently tied up doing the ecm stage 1's to keep the deep stage 2's going on M4007.
Thanks....
petrw1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Thinking of Joining GPU to 72 jschwar313 GPU to 72 3 2016-01-31 00:50
Thinking about lasieve5 Batalov Factoring 6 2011-12-27 22:40
Thinking about buying a panda jasong jasong 1 2008-11-11 09:43
Loud thinking on irregular primes devarajkandadai Math 4 2007-07-25 03:01
Question on unfactored numbers... WraithX GMP-ECM 1 2006-03-19 22:16

All times are UTC. The time now is 22:05.

Sat Apr 4 22:05:06 UTC 2020 up 10 days, 19:38, 0 users, load averages: 1.55, 1.58, 1.58

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.