![]() |
|
|
#1024 |
|
"Composite as Heck"
Oct 2017
827 Posts |
Damn the DC did use the wrong type, the worktodo was not wrong I guess gpuowl can only do type 4. Can anyone point me in the direction of a DC with type 4 exponent to grab? Don;t think the DB can be searched by type and the recent results are all type 5 or 1.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1025 | |
|
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest
153D16 Posts |
Quote:
Additionally verify the shift was not zero. Gpuowl does zero shift only, so is not a good DC for a zero shift first test, and a triple check would follow. See also http://www.mersenne.ca/exponent/84004321 which does not indicate residue type there. Zero shift first PRP tests should be DC by prime95 not gpuowl, to ensure a nonzero DC. See 84006781. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1026 |
|
"Composite as Heck"
Oct 2017
827 Posts |
Thanks, I was lazy researching but would never have figured to use v3.8.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1027 | |
|
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest
5,437 Posts |
Quote:
https://www.mersenne.org/report_expo...4102691&full=1. Since I ran it, I have a list of interim residues a short run could be checked against. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1028 |
|
162568 Posts |
It was with the wrong set of system software, not enough up to date, gpuowl started but after a while the residue was zeroed out, and a page fault occurred.
After installing the latest kernel, modules and headers, v. 5.0, then gpuowl works without problems and the zero-residue error is gone. |
|
|
|
#1029 | |
|
5×487 Posts |
Quote:
The same error has occurred again, zero-residue, but this time gpuowl reloaded the last checkpoint and continued. I found that I was running a version of openowl compiled against old libs. Now I have recompiled and waiting to see if the error occurs again. |
|
|
|
|
#1030 | |
|
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest
5,437 Posts |
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1031 |
|
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest
5,437 Posts |
I've extended the third attachment at https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpo...35&postcount=2 to include a plot of the per iteration times on an RX480 gpu for whichever version of gpuowl tested fastest for each fft length. An approximation of the asymptotic scaling of gpuowl is p1.078 for ms/iter, p2.078 for exponent run time, from the trend line fit for fft lengths 6M to 144M (exponents 100M<p<2520M). This is close to values obtained for CUDALucas and prime95, ~2.094, and finally provides for gpuowl a scaling above p2, which is more consistent with expectations of scaling n2 log n log log n from such reliable sources as Knuth.
Last fiddled with by kriesel on 2019-03-31 at 15:05 |
|
|
|
|
|
#1032 | |
|
23·3·73 Posts |
Quote:
After some hour no error. Will see today the continuation. |
|
|
|
|
#1033 |
|
"Mr. Meeseeks"
Jan 2012
California, USA
23×271 Posts |
^ TIL... Is there any way at all to lookup exponents that have been done with a specific type?
|
|
|
|
|
|
#1034 | |
|
Sep 2003
5·11·47 Posts |
Quote:
Warning: not all are type 4. There's no way to filter by residue type, although you can click on the "Residue Type" column header to sort by it. Also, I think gpuOwL only produces residues with shift count zero, so the double check will also have shift count zero, and some might insist that it's not a proper double check unless it's with a different shift count. |
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| mfakto: an OpenCL program for Mersenne prefactoring | Bdot | GPU Computing | 1676 | 2021-06-30 21:23 |
| GPUOWL AMD Windows OpenCL issues | xx005fs | GpuOwl | 0 | 2019-07-26 21:37 |
| Testing an expression for primality | 1260 | Software | 17 | 2015-08-28 01:35 |
| Testing Mersenne cofactors for primality? | CRGreathouse | Computer Science & Computational Number Theory | 18 | 2013-06-08 19:12 |
| Primality-testing program with multiple types of moduli (PFGW-related) | Unregistered | Information & Answers | 4 | 2006-10-04 22:38 |