Welcome to Lone Mersenne Hunters - Page 3

garo · 2005-07-14, 07:47

Hey that is a great graph. But if you stack the graph up next to the LL test times by the same machines you will find that AMD64 and Pentium-M are indeed more suitable. Particularly if we take into account the new factoring limits which mean that less time is spent on the bits above 64 which reduce the advantage of the AMD64 and P4.

Still, as the graph clearly shows, the AMD64 is teh 1ner.

hbock · 2005-07-15, 12:18

Well, if we are talking about LMH ranges this will typically be, also in future, a factoring depth between 61 and 63 bits, ie. the following TF before the LL-test will take most of the time (>90%) for factoring from 64 to 67 bits or higher.
Nevertheless, everybody can do with his computer what he wants to do.
Maybe I'll add the graph of the LL timings for the same procs later, just as an additional for help for decision.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
For the amusement of the record prime hunters	a1call	Miscellaneous Math	11	2017-02-05 07:19
Hello fellow prime number hunters.	zampa	Information & Answers	5	2016-04-22 02:04
Prime hunters: I need your input :)	opyrt	Prime Sierpinski Project	6	2009-12-28 17:42
Mersenne Wiki: Improving the mersenne primes web site by FOSS methods	optim	PrimeNet	13	2004-07-09 13:51
Old Lone Mersenne Hunter maillist taken down	tha	Lone Mersenne Hunters	2	2003-02-28 11:19

2005-07-14, 07:47	#23
garo Aug 2002 Termonfeckin, IE 2²×691 Posts	Hey that is a great graph. But if you stack the graph up next to the LL test times by the same machines you will find that AMD64 and Pentium-M are indeed more suitable. Particularly if we take into account the new factoring limits which mean that less time is spent on the bits above 64 which reduce the advantage of the AMD64 and P4. Still, as the graph clearly shows, the AMD64 is teh 1ner.

2005-07-15, 12:18	#24
hbock Feb 2003 163 Posts	Well, if we are talking about LMH ranges this will typically be, also in future, a factoring depth between 61 and 63 bits, ie. the following TF before the LL-test will take most of the time (>90%) for factoring from 64 to 67 bits or higher. Nevertheless, everybody can do with his computer what he wants to do. Maybe I'll add the graph of the LL timings for the same procs later, just as an additional for help for decision.