mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Factoring

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2009-01-31, 19:50   #1
fivemack
(loop (#_fork))
 
fivemack's Avatar
 
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England

22·3·232 Posts
Default 32/33 and 15e/16e crossover point

These are with N=2^941-1, rlim=alim=200M, sieving 200M .. 200M+10^4

Code:
side lp siever yield time/rel
alg 32 15  6237 2.29344
alg 33 15 11693 1.21814
alg 32 16 13320 2.79733
alg 33 16 25553 1.45897
rat 32 15  8559 1.99026
rat 33 15 16440 1.03673
rat 32 16 17536 2.57357
rat 33 16 33922 1.30827
which looks as if 32-bit large primes and 16e is the right way to go for numbers of this size (changing the siever doubles the yield at a fairly small cost in runtime; lp=33 doubles the yield and the number required at the same time so is no net benefit). Probably rational side 0-300M. rlim=alim=200M was a guess, I'll do some more runs to optimise that.

This would be a Big Calculation with capital Big; 2.6 seconds per relation and we need half a billion, so 40 CPU-years. 16e is a prodigious user of memory (about 4G virtual of which just over 1G used), so this may be more a project for people with clusters than for random home user - indeed, that might be a bit more of a strain on clusters than their administrators really want.
fivemack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-02-01, 03:16   #2
FactorEyes
 
FactorEyes's Avatar
 
Oct 2006
vomit_frame_pointer

23·32·5 Posts
Default News I can use?

I may write this down somewhere.

Then again...
FactorEyes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-02-02, 10:06   #3
Andi47
 
Andi47's Avatar
 
Oct 2004
Austria

2·17·73 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fivemack View Post
This would be a Big Calculation with capital Big; 2.6 seconds per relation and we need half a billion, so 40 CPU-years. 16e is a prodigious user of memory (about 4G virtual of which just over 1G used), so this may be more a project for people with clusters than for random home user - indeed, that might be a bit more of a strain on clusters than their administrators really want.
Can you please post your polynomial file (including mfbr/a, a/rlambda) - I want to do some benchmarks on my PC (running on 32-bit Windows XP) to see if it would fit in 1 GB or if it needs more.

(BTW: my office box where I used to run my ranges in your factoring projects has got 1 GB RAM, so running 16e will be almost certainly too much if I am present and want to use word, excel, etc., but I will be out of office for ~2 weeks in the beginning of march and therfore can possibly run a small range with 16e in the meantime - iff it fits into 1 GB.)
Andi47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-02-02, 10:24   #4
10metreh
 
10metreh's Avatar
 
Nov 2008

91216 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fivemack View Post
These are with N=2^941-1, rlim=alim=200M, sieving 200M .. 200M+10^4

Code:
side lp siever yield time/rel
alg 32 15  6237 2.29344
alg 33 15 11693 1.21814
alg 32 16 13320 2.79733
alg 33 16 25553 1.45897
rat 32 15  8559 1.99026
rat 33 15 16440 1.03673
rat 32 16 17536 2.57357
rat 33 16 33922 1.30827
which looks as if 32-bit large primes and 16e is the right way to go for numbers of this size (changing the siever doubles the yield at a fairly small cost in runtime; lp=33 doubles the yield and the number required at the same time so is no net benefit). Probably rational side 0-300M. rlim=alim=200M was a guess, I'll do some more runs to optimise that.

This would be a Big Calculation with capital Big; 2.6 seconds per relation and we need half a billion, so 40 CPU-years. 16e is a prodigious user of memory (about 4G virtual of which just over 1G used), so this may be more a project for people with clusters than for random home user - indeed, that might be a bit more of a strain on clusters than their administrators really want.
I see you're testing M941. What is your plan after 10^263-1 is finished?
10metreh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-02-02, 11:49   #5
fivemack
(loop (#_fork))
 
fivemack's Avatar
 
Feb 2006
Cambridge, England

22×3×232 Posts
Default

andi47: No feasible -16e run will fit on a 32-bit machine. Sorry.

10metreh: next project will be GNFS on 109!+1, starting with a month of polynomial selection; I'm currently trying to find good parameters for the polynomial selection run.
fivemack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-02-02, 18:20   #6
Andi47
 
Andi47's Avatar
 
Oct 2004
Austria

2×17×73 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fivemack View Post
andi47: No feasible -16e run will fit on a 32-bit machine. Sorry.
Is it way to slow or way to memory-hungry on a 32 bit machine?
Andi47 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-02-02, 19:18   #7
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(3,3^1118781+1)/3

2×13×347 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by fivemack View Post
...16e is a prodigious user of memory (about 4G virtual of which just over 1G used), so this may be more a project for people with clusters than for random home user - indeed, that might be a bit more of a strain on clusters than their administrators really want.
See the very beginning. Memory hungry. And slow, too.

When Tom says 4Gb - he means and 4Gb and a bit more, too. (and Win usually needs a big chunk of memory for itself.)
This is a project for the 21st century and we'll all have to tweak the tools first. It is possible (and ultimately desirable) that a modified version of the 16e siever will later fit (Tom, I think that for many ranges SCHED_TOL can be actually lowered from 2). But now just yet.
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-04-21, 07:59   #8
Batalov
 
Batalov's Avatar
 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(3,3^1118781+1)/3

2×13×347 Posts
Default

Here are the 32-bit re-runs with the experimental siever (on a Phenom940):
Code:
side	lp	siever	yield1	sec/rel	yield2	sec/rel
alg	32	15e	6237	2.29344	6238	(1.01389 sec/rel)
rat	32	15e	8559	1.99026	8558	(0.87265 sec/rel)

alg	32	16e	13320	2.79733	13322	(1.29829 sec/rel)
rat	32	16e	17536	2.57357	17537	(1.16108 sec/rel
The time/rel are simply proportional (the CPU and the code is different).
The number of relns is +- a few, too; this is a known effect.
The memory footprint, though, for 15e and 16e was
586m (1031m virt.) for 15e
682m (1446m virt.) for 16e

Not as bad as with old memory allocations. Not 4g/1g!


Note, that I have not quite figured out all new Kleinjung code (lasieve5), indeed there are many changes there ...and there are 15e, 15f, 15g siever variants!
Batalov is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
QS/NFS crossover points bsquared Factoring 24 2016-01-25 05:09
29 to 30 bit large prime SNFS crossover VBCurtis Factoring 11 2015-03-09 07:01
Moving a point from A to B kuratkull Programming 15 2007-08-24 23:00
any body play with the soft fft crossover yes? crash893 Software 9 2002-09-18 20:45
Can I move an exponent near a FFT crossover to my P III? svempasnake Software 2 2002-09-09 21:32

All times are UTC. The time now is 03:22.

Sat May 30 03:22:09 UTC 2020 up 66 days, 55 mins, 1 user, load averages: 1.92, 1.55, 1.50

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.