20210327, 01:15  #34  
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest
3^{2}·601 Posts 
Quote:
The odds are much less affected by number of users doing this, than throughput of those users that are. Higher throughput users will have some degree of automation in place. The top N in the top 500 producers list provide half the total project throughput, where N is a small number. A bit of spreadsheet work with https://www.mersenne.org/report_top_500_custom/?type=0 as input shows N is 3 to 7, bounded by assuming users ranked by overall throughput #501  #4612 contributed negligible amounts, or assuming all #501 to #4612 users in the past year contributed as much as #500. All contributions are welcome, big small or medium. Every user in the project began with 0 GHzD in their past year. 

20210327, 01:46  #35  
Einyen
Dec 2003
Denmark
2×1,579 Posts 
Quote:
I think most users on this forum has one or more 24/7 "automatized" computers, while I guess some users like you do not run them 24/7 for power, temperature or noise reasons. Last fiddled with by ATH on 20210327 at 01:47 

20210328, 22:34  #36  
Jan 2020
158_{16} Posts 
Quote:
I expect these 4 exponents will yield some composite results within the next 3 days, guess who's running all of them? https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...3330391&full=1 https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...3337323&full=1 https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...3373321&full=1 https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...3397341&full=1 Quote:
Quote:
To be clear, my real crush is not Ben Delo, here's the link to my ultimate hero  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xiumin Last fiddled with by tuckerkao on 20210328 at 22:52 

20210329, 00:51  #37 
6809 > 6502
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts
2×4,903 Posts 
I am using work machines. I don't want the hassle of finding a prime on a machine without all of the t's dotted and i's crossed. So I have most workers doing DC's, 1 is doing P1 all of the time, one worked was doing PRPCF, but I am using it now for some P1 on some Cat 0 exponents that are stuck on P1 by others. Sometimes I use that work for targeted DC's. I chose to work on parts of the project I like. For years I worked on TF in the 332M range to keep loons from wasting time doing LL's on exponents that have a factor that is practical to find.

20210329, 03:01  #38 
Jan 2020
158_{16} Posts 
It was surely nice that ViliamF found a factor between 2^78 and 2^79 for M103,332,391
https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...exp_hi=&full=1 This is only practical for him. If I run all those P1 and trial factoring from 2^76 to 2^79, it'll take around 5 to 6 full days which is more than half of the time duration compare to a PRP test on my PC. 2^73 to 2^74 > 1 hour+ 2^74 to 2^75 > 2 hours+ 2^75 to 2^76 > 4 hours+ 2^76 to 2^77 > 8 hours+ 2^77 to 2^78 > 16 hours+ 2^78 to 2^79 > 1 day and 8 hours+ If my GPU gets too hot, it's even slower than that. I plan to perform the trial factoring to 2^77 and P1 with the suggested bounds for the exponents below. Unless ViliamF wants to do the higher bits, I probably will directly run the PRP tests. M168,3**,3*1 402, 415, 423, 432, 454, 463, 472, 487, 489, 498 705, 712, 715, 735, 753, 769, 771, 777, 784, 793, 798 The whole list is probably too much, the 2 exponents I'm more likely to go after are M168,347,321 and M168,377,311 consider I've spent over 5 weeks for M168,377,323 Last fiddled with by tuckerkao on 20210329 at 03:27 
20210401, 00:23  #39 
Jan 2020
344_{10} Posts 
For some reason I had a very bad luck landing on the exponents with the FPM1 results recently. I've done a whole bunch of P1 factoring in the M103,300,000+ range, the 1 I skipped was the candidate that had an interesting factor 
https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...exp_hi=&full=1 I hadn't found a single factor during the entire March 2021. I recalled someone said that there was around 7% to 8% chance finding a factor through P1 factoring. Last fiddled with by tuckerkao on 20210401 at 00:36 
20210401, 00:43  #40 
6809 > 6502
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts
10011001001110_{2} Posts 
I didn't look at what the chance of finding a factor you had for your individual exponents. But, let's suppose that it is either 3 or 5 %. At 3% you would expect 1 factor for every 33 exponents, on average (in large groups). If it is 5% (which I doubt you are doing), it goes to 1 in 20, again on average. So, doing 40 and not finding a factor is well within that 1 in 20 average. Do lots of tests 300 or more, then worry about your averages.

20210401, 00:57  #41 
Jan 2020
101011000_{2} Posts 
The no factor results also appeared on all of my trial factoring exponents for the entire March 2021.
I'll keep trying if the no factor list grows too long, I'm wondering whether there can be the hardware issues. 
20210401, 04:06  #42 
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest
3^{2}·601 Posts 
I count 55 NF lines. That is a very likely outcome for such bit levels.
For probability 1/75, 55 tries, chance of zero factors 48%. https://www.gigacalculator.com/calcu...calculator.php 
20210405, 06:40  #43  
Jan 2020
2^{3}·43 Posts 
Quote:
It seems like I cannot get anyone else on exponent this size, so I have to test those all myself, anyone feels like trial factoring between 2^78 to 2^79 is necessary or not? https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...exp_hi=&full=1 

20210405, 14:40  #44 
6809 > 6502
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts
2×4,903 Posts 
Do all the factoring you want, just stop whinging about it. Also, stop begging people to do work for you. Run PRP's (with version 30) on your own numbers.

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Automatic fetch of Trial Factoring work for GPU mfakt*  LaurV  GPU to 72  81  20201202 05:17 
Simple Script to get Trial Factoring Work  jfamestad  PrimeNet  3  20161106 20:32 
Why trial factoring work chopped into chunks?  lidocorc  PrimeNet  4  20081106 18:48 
How does the trial factoring work with 15K*2^n1  jocelynl  15k Search  0  20030711 14:23 
How does trialfactoring work?  ThomRuley  Software  5  20030530 20:34 