mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Aliquot Sequences

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2009-03-24, 07:37   #23
10metreh
 
10metreh's Avatar
 
Nov 2008

232210 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mdettweiler View Post
The next line (2358) has a C92 that survived full ECM. My resources are completely tied up for tonight, so if anyone else wants to do QS on this, go ahead. If nobody's grabbed it by the time I get on tomorrow (probably late morning) I'll do it myself since things should be freed up a bit by then.

The number is:
Code:
23815769543009537132187278752799013868767385674615392411879275450950012601757447373080004859
I'd like to see this done by this afternoon/early evening (GMT), because this gives me most time to compute more.
10metreh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-03-24, 07:38   #24
mdettweiler
A Sunny Moo
 
mdettweiler's Avatar
 
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)

3·2,083 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by 10metreh View Post
I'd like to see this done by this afternoon/early evening (GMT), because this gives me most time to compute more.
Okay, no problem. I presume, thus, that you'll do it? (considering that it's 7AM GMT right now)
mdettweiler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-03-24, 07:47   #25
10metreh
 
10metreh's Avatar
 
Nov 2008

2×33×43 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mdettweiler View Post
Okay, no problem. I presume, thus, that you'll do it? (considering that it's 7AM GMT right now)
Nope - no computer access for a while. I won't have much time until the weekend to do jobs much larger than C85.

Last fiddled with by 10metreh on 2009-03-24 at 07:49
10metreh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-03-24, 08:21   #26
axn
 
axn's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

11×421 Posts
Default

Msieve is cranking away on the C92 even as we speak! ETA: 2 hours.
axn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-03-24, 11:22   #27
mklasson
 
Feb 2004

2×3×43 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mdettweiler View Post
Oh, wait! I just realized what's going on. henryzz, are you by chance using the 64-bit version of gnfs-lasieve4I12e? I'm using the 32-bit version, which of course is about half as fast--so that would explain the discrepancy perfectly.
I'm not so sure about that. The 64-bit version is significantly slower than the 32-bit version on my system... I don't know why, but I've seen other people report the same problem (which was why I checked and noticed it in the first place).

Maybe comparing yield over a certain range is a more portable way of measuring the poly quality?
mklasson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-03-24, 12:30   #28
axn
 
axn's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

11·421 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mklasson View Post
Maybe comparing yield over a certain range is a more portable way of measuring the poly quality?
Without knowing the actual factor base sizes, large prime bounds, etc.., it is an apples to oranges comparison, innit?
axn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-03-24, 12:39   #29
mklasson
 
Feb 2004

10216 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by axn View Post
Without knowing the actual factor base sizes, large prime bounds, etc.., it is an apples to oranges comparison, innit?
I'm not suggesting it should be used for anything serious... It just seemed a possibly better idea for them than comparing the sec/rel with different processors.
mklasson is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-03-24, 12:47   #30
10metreh
 
10metreh's Avatar
 
Nov 2008

2×33×43 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by axn View Post
Msieve is cranking away on the C92 even as we speak! ETA: 2 hours.
And... (I'm not at home, so I won't be able to do much work on the next iteraton(s))

Last fiddled with by 10metreh on 2009-03-24 at 12:49
10metreh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-03-24, 12:50   #31
axn
 
axn's Avatar
 
Jun 2003

10010000101112 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mklasson View Post
I'm not suggesting it should be used for anything serious... It just seemed a possibly better idea for them than comparing the sec/rel with different processors.
Even though I quoted your post specifically, it was intended at the general discussion. The two different speeds posted here for the two different polys didn't have enough supporting information to tell if it is an anomaly or par for the course (quite possible that both are using the default values for factMsieve, but we don't know). I was just trying to highlight that fact

Anyway, the difference between the two CPUs (3GHz Q6600 (4MB L2) vs 2.2GHz E4500 (1MB L2)) is enough to explain the bulk of the discrepancy.

For proper comparison of two polys, the SOP is to trial sieve at different q-values with the same set of parameters, and look at the sieve speed (which is IMO, better than yield count) for the _same_ processor.

EDIT:- The discussion is getting pretty offtopic. So...

Last fiddled with by axn on 2009-03-24 at 12:52 Reason: offtopic
axn is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-03-24, 13:08   #32
bsquared
 
bsquared's Avatar
 
"Ben"
Feb 2007

26·3·17 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mklasson View Post
I'm not so sure about that. The 64-bit version is significantly slower than the 32-bit version on my system... I don't know why, but I've seen other people report the same problem (which was why I checked and noticed it in the first place).

Maybe comparing yield over a certain range is a more portable way of measuring the poly quality?
There are two 64 bit gnfs-lasieve*Ie versions, one with and one without assembly optimizations. The one with is approximatly twice as fast as the one without (and twice as fast as the 32bit version), but AFAIK, is only available on linux.
bsquared is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2009-03-24, 13:16   #33
mklasson
 
Feb 2004

4028 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bsquared View Post
There are two 64 bit gnfs-lasieve*Ie versions, one with and one without assembly optimizations. The one with is approximatly twice as fast as the one without (and twice as fast as the 32bit version), but AFAIK, is only available on linux.
Ah, what horrible bad luck for me to be running windows then... As usual, inline asm seems to be the culprit.
mklasson is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Reserved for MF - Sequence 3366 RichD Aliquot Sequences 406 2020-06-10 03:10
Primes in n-fibonacci sequence and n-step fibonacci sequence sweety439 And now for something completely different 17 2017-06-13 03:49
ECM for c166 from 4788:2661 frmky Aliquot Sequences 36 2011-04-28 06:27
ECM work on 4788:2549.c170 schickel Aliquot Sequences 51 2011-01-05 02:32
80M to 64 bits ... but not really reserved petrw1 Lone Mersenne Hunters 82 2010-01-11 01:57

All times are UTC. The time now is 18:02.

Fri Jul 3 18:02:16 UTC 2020 up 100 days, 15:35, 2 users, load averages: 1.19, 1.37, 1.42

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.