20190812, 08:00  #12 
Romulan Interpreter
Jun 2011
Thailand
10000011000000_{2} Posts 
Just to note that some exponents in the past were used for different purposes (like benchmarks, etc) and they do have tens or hundreds of tests, for those reasons. For the rest, we are mainly in a violent agreement

20190812, 14:22  #13  
Einyen
Dec 2003
Denmark
2^{2}·17·41 Posts 
Quote:
It just annoys me those low bit levels are not showing up on the exponents... 

20190812, 15:03  #14  
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest
7×491 Posts 
Quote:
The most commonly used GIMPS applications provide convenient measures of throughput or its inverse at the console or log file during production computations (with no need to duplicate previously completed work): prime95/mprime ms/iter in LL or PRP, time taken between progress indications in P1 stage 1 or 2 or in TF Mlucas sec/iteration gpuowl ms/it or ms/sq depending on version CUDALucas ms/iter Mfaktc GhzD/day Mfakto GhzD/day CUDAPm1 ms/iter or ms/transform cllucas ms/iter (obsolescent, use faster gpuowl) Benchmarking directions: gpu LL test https://www.mersenne.ca/cudalucas.php upper right of page; 30,000 iterations of 57885161 gpu trial factoring https://www.mersenne.ca/mfaktc.php "show benchmark submission form" link near the top of that page; fill in the form with information gathered from a useful production run. cpu LL & TF (prime95) benchmarks: https://www.mersenne.ca/bench.php "Data shown here is mostly for historical reference, and is no longer being actively maintained." There's no need now in benchmarking, for additional duplicative complete primality tests or P1 runs or TF runs, nor to clutter up the primenet database with them. Timing information can be obtained from useful runs on exponents that need runs. There are also scaling guides available to estimate from one exponent's timing to a very different exponent's timing, either by the O(n log n log log n) or similar from number theory, or empirical relations developed by runs of widely spaced exponents that were not duplicated work. Last fiddled with by kriesel on 20190812 at 15:10 

20190812, 15:32  #15  
Sep 2003
2×1,289 Posts 
Quote:
Perhaps Madpoo can change the Exponent Status report page on mersenne.org and James Heinrich can change the mersenne.ca page, to have a static fixed disclaimer that warns people against TFing less than 67 bits, especially for small exponents where the actual TF that was done is much lower than that. And maybe the ECM status of each exponent could also be displayed on the Exponent Status page, with the t=N digits level translated into a bit level, again to warn about TF being fruitless. 

20190812, 20:47  #16  
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest
7·491 Posts 
Quote:
The current status of the most common GIMPS applications is as I understand it,
There are also collections of interim residues available online for comparison of short runs on a variety of exponent and therefore a variety of fft sizes. See https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpo...82&postcount=4 for LL interim residues, and https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpo...83&postcount=5 for PRP interim residues. 

20190812, 21:15  #17 
If I May
"Chris Halsall"
Sep 2002
Barbados
21175_{8} Posts 
It is important to point out that the selftests for mfaktX are for the software, not the hardware. And there have been cases where a card was bad and missed one or more factors (generally found by noticing a statistically significant low success rate in a large sample set)...

20190813, 01:45  #18  
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest
7·491 Posts 
Quote:
There are also cases where the software is ok and perhaps a gpu that's not will spit out the same bogus factor repeatedly, or when a Windows TDR hits on a very slow gpu there is a 1:1 correspondence; 12 TDRs, 12 occurrences of the same old factor of a different Mersenne number. Boosting the timeout value in the registry cleared it up, so good software, correctly functioning ancient gpu, just too slow for the default setting. Last fiddled with by kriesel on 20190813 at 01:53 

20190813, 03:07  #19 
Jul 2014
47_{10} Posts 
@kriesel
maybe you could focus on more positive aspects of gimps dont obsess about a 10 year old duplicate. what i like to do is pick a subproject and contribute to it. i dont know your skillset, here are some suggestions 1) beta test software 2) run benchmarks on new hardware 3) run cat0/1 LL/PRP to complete milestones 4) do gimps fundraising 5) high level gimps 5/10 year plan 6) try all work types (LL,PRP,TF,ECM,PM1) see which one you like 7) tune your hardware,software settings 8) install prime95 on an old laptop, see if it works gimps is FUN!!!! 
20190813, 18:57  #20  
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest
7·491 Posts 
Quote:
About me: see https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpo...3&postcount=11 See also https://www.mersenneforum.org/showth...922#post521922, begun May 2018, over 160 reference posts and growing. Have a look around there. Tactful suggestions for other additions are welcome. 

20190813, 22:09  #21 
Jul 2014
47 Posts 
I have tried all work types. I have 1 PC w/2 GPUs. I have a limited budget.
I like finding factors with mfaktc TF. 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Duplication of Effort for Smaller Aliquot Sequences  EdH  Aliquot Sequences  3  20180417 13:31 
Duplication of work: local vs. db  EdH  Aliquot Sequences  2  20101231 04:30 
2801^791; thoughts on duplication sampling  fivemack  Factoring  0  20100415 22:23 