prime 95

im making an ll test of a number, i set my cpu to use 2048 mb of ram because i have 4 g on a core 2 duo but prime 95 is only using 65 mb of ram and the iteration time is 0.109 sec but i want to incress the memory to reduce the time how can i do?

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

im making an ll test of a number, i set my cpu to use 2048 mb of ram because i have 4 g on a core 2 duo but prime 95 is only using 65 mb of ram and the iteration time is 0.109 sec but i want to incress the memory to reduce the time how can i do?

Assumes facts not in evidence.

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

im making an ll test of a number, i set my cpu to use 2048 mb of ram because i have 4 g on a core 2 duo but prime 95 is only using 65 mb of ram and the iteration time is 0.109 sec but i want to incress the memory to reduce the time how can i do?

The "available memory" setting isn't for the L-L test. It's for stage 2 of the P-1 and ECM factoring methods. (P-1 might be assigned to go along with an L-L test under certain circumstances, or it can be requested as an assignment type. ECM can be requested as an assignment type)

The L-L test doesn't need any extra memory beyond the 65 MB your monitor shows. It can't even use "available memory" to speed up -- it's doing what it does as efficiently as possible already in the 65 MB.

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

Assumes facts not in evidence.

If you don't understand the OP question, why don't you leave it for someone else like me to answer?

If you do understand the OP question, why didn't you answer it instead of throwing in that cute but useless comment?

[Uncwilly]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

Assumes facts not in evidence.

This is the appropriate area of the forum for those that "don't have a clue". Those of us that have tact will deal with them. I don't want to discourage noobs.

[R.D. Silverman]

Originally Posted by Uncwilly

This is the appropriate area of the forum for those that "don't have a clue". Those of us that have tact will deal with them. I don't want to discourage noobs.

I made a simple, correct statement that the question assumed facts
that were not in evidence. There is nothing tactless about a simple statement
of fact.

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by R.D. Silverman

I made a simple, correct statement that the question assumed facts
that were not in evidence.

Which facts-not-in-evidence that are necessary for answering the OP's question could not be reasonably supposed to be implicitly incorporated by the OP's use of phrases

"prime 95"
"making an ll test"
"set my cpu to use 2048 mb of ram"
"only using 65 mb of ram"
"iteration time is 0.109 sec"
"want to incress the memory"
"to reduce the time"
and
"how can i do?"

plus (importantly) one's past experience with GIMPS?

For instance, "prime 95" can, in context of this forum, reasonably be taken to mean the executable "prime95.exe". Such a brief reference implicitly generally refers to all the operational characteristics of prime95.exe, without the need to quote from the readme.txt.

Other phrases specify parameters the OP is using that could be useful when answering his question.

(Personally, I found that the combination of "prime 95", "making an ll test", "set my cpu to use 2048 mb of ram", "only using 65 mb of ram", "want to incress the memory", "to reduce the time" and "how can i do?" were all I needed to understand what the OP wanted. My experience with typical newbie inquiries provided all the additional info I needed to diagnose the problem and compose an explanation. I also understood why the OP included "iteration time is 0.109 sec" as an item that could have been useful for getting an answer, even though it turned out that in this case I didn't actually need to know that particular fact in order to answer.)

What facts do you consider necessary to formulate an answer to the OP question that neither are in evidence nor can be reasonably inferred from the phrases actually provided by the OP, when considered in light of your GIMPS experience?

[axn]

Originally Posted by cheesehead

"how can i do?"

assumes that one "can". I think that was the fact-not-in-evidence that Bob was referring to. If the OP had phrased it as "can i incress [sic] the memory to reduce the time?", the answer would've been "No".

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by axn

assumes that one "can". I think that was the fact-not-in-evidence that Bob was referring to.

I think most of us here are quite capable here of interpreting "how can i do?" as meaning that the asker may be assuming that something can be done, but also realizing that the entirety of the request also implies that the asker is probably not aware that the specific thing he wants done is not possible.

However, I grant that some of our folks (as with folks in other parts of my life) may have an impairment of the ability to think about the thoughts and beliefs of others. This could make it difficult to deduce that someone might not be aware of some limitation familiar to us veterans.

Thinking about the thoughts and beliefs of others is apparently one of the functions of the brain's right temporo-parietal junction (RTPJ). It has been shown to be able to be temporarily impaired by applied magnetic pulses (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8593748.stm). Perhaps some people have a permanent (i.e., not triggered by applied external magnetic fields) impairment in that or some other region with similar function. Or maybe this is a matter of degree; folks possess a range of abilities in this regard. Experiments have shown that some animals (dogs, chimps, monkeys) also show signs of having this ability to some extent.

Note: The BBC article I reference above is focused on an experiment involving moral sensibility. I'm NOT meaning that morality is involved in the issue of interpreting a newbie's question. Ability to think about the thoughts and beliefs of newbies when interpreting questions about prime95 in this forum has nothing to do with morality.

If the OP had phrased it as "can i incress [sic] the memory to reduce the time?", the answer would've been "No".

But that wasn't the actual question.

Sure, _if_ the OP had written, "I'm not sure this can be done. Can it? If so, how?" that would have demonstrated that the OP was aware that it might not necessarily be possible that a memory increase could reduce the time. But he didn't.

Furthermore, our past experience with newbie questions has shown that many newbies lack that particular awareness. Indeed, that they even ask shows that they _are_ aware that time-versus-space tradeoffs _are_ possible in _some_ computer programs; they're just not (yet) aware that the prime95 L-L test is not one of them.

gente perdon por no poder hablar inglés correctamente pero si al leerlo entiendo lo que escriben el problema es que no pude escribir correctamente lo que quería que es preguntarles si hay alguna manera de incrementar el uso de la ram en el test LL porque como se explicó usa solo 65 mb pero creo que con todo ese pleito mejor dejo el programa en paz y me retiro de GIMPS

Translation provided by translate.google.com, added by moderator:

pardon people for not being able to speak English properly but if you read what you write understand the problem is that I could not write correctly what he wanted to ask if there is any way to increase the use of the ram in the LL test used because as explained only 65 mb but I think that with all that better suit the program left in peace and I retire from GIMPS

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by Unregistered

Translation provided by translate.google.com, added by moderator:

pardon people for not being able to speak English properly but if you read what you write understand the problem is that I could not write correctly what he wanted to ask if there is any way to increase the use of the ram in the LL test used because as explained only 65 mb

I understood that request as soon as I read post #1. I hope my answer in post #3 was what was needed.

but I think that with all that better suit the program left in peace and I retire from GIMPS

Please don't leave because of Mr. Silverman's comments, or because of our comments to Mr. Silverman.