Results

ET_ · 2012-09-13, 18:31

Please, insert here your results.txt files, so that we'll have a unique place to look to when in doubt.

Luigi

rcv · 2012-09-13, 19:17

Posting here for historic purposes. George's program was not yet ready for the public, but the kernel for MM127 was working fine. George invited me to work on this range. The early kernel kept the GPU so busy, that when run on my primary video card, the video lag / system responsiveness was measured in minutes. I ran this on a secondary card to which no video was connected. Started on about August 22, 2012. Finished on September 10, 2012. (With a software upgrade in the interim.) The work used a dedicated EVGA NVIDIA GTX 570.

The actual results.txt line reported is:

Code:

no factor for M131071 from 2^68 to 2^69 [mfaktc 0.20 barrett92_mul32_gs]

In English, the above translates to

Code:

no factor for MM127 from 2^178 to 2^179 [mfaktc 0.20 barrett92_mul32_gs]

While the results line may appear bogus, George didn't yet have the complete input/output interface. "M131071" was code for "MM127". The bit-ranges were adjusted by 110. [That's why the above "translation" is provided.]

science_man_88 · 2012-09-13, 19:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by rcv

Posting here for historic purposes. George's program was not yet ready for the public, but the kernel for MM127 was working fine. George invited me to work on this range. The early kernel kept the GPU so busy, that when run on my primary video card, the video lag / system responsiveness was measured in minutes. I ran this on a secondary card to which no video was connected. Started on about August 22, 2012. Finished on September 10, 2012. (With a software upgrade in the interim.) The work used a dedicated EVGA NVIDIA GTX 570.

The actual results.txt line reported is:

Code:

no factor for M131071 from 2^68 to 2^69 [mfaktc 0.20 barrett92_mul32_gs]

In English, the above translates to

Code:

no factor for MM127 from 2^178 to 2^179 [mfaktc 0.20 barrett92_mul32_gs]

Code:

(16:20)>(2^127-1)
%13 = 170141183460469231731687303715884105727

you tested MM17 or it appears so.

rcv · 2012-09-13, 19:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by science_man_88

you tested MM17

Feel free to retest the range. The software is faster now. It should take 16.7 days on a factory-clocked EVGA GTX 570.

science_man_88 · 2012-09-13, 19:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by rcv

Feel free to retest the range. The software is faster now. It should take 16.7 days on a factory-clocked EVGA GTX 570.

I don't have a GPU, I was just saying I don't see how M131071=MM17 to one bit range is MM127 to another bit range. okay never mind I see the edit.

ET_ · 2012-09-13, 19:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by rcv

Posting here for historic purposes. George's program was not yet ready for the public, but the kernel for MM127 was working fine. George invited me to work on this range. The early kernel kept the GPU so busy, that when run on my primary video card, the video lag / system responsiveness was measured in minutes. I ran this on a secondary card to which no video was connected. Started on about August 22, 2012. Finished on September 10, 2012. (With a software upgrade in the interim.) The work used a dedicated EVGA NVIDIA GTX 570.

The actual results.txt line reported is:

Code:

no factor for M131071 from 2^68 to 2^69 [mfaktc 0.20 barrett92_mul32_gs]

In English, the above translates to

Code:

no factor for MM127 from 2^178 to 2^179 [mfaktc 0.20 barrett92_mul32_gs]

While the results line may appear bogus, George didn't yet have the complete input/output interface. "M131071" was code for "MM127". The bit-ranges were adjusted by 110. [That's why the above "translation" is provided.]

So it seems that the early pre-alpha version run on barrett_92 kernel, after a fast hacking on the 95bit limit of the factor. Or maybe the name of the kernel was the same while its content was changed...

Prime95 · 2012-09-13, 20:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by ET_

So it seems that the early pre-alpha version run on barrett_92 kernel, after a fast hacking on the 95bit limit of the factor. Or maybe the name of the kernel was the same while its content was changed...

The early, pre-pre-alpha was a complete hack. 131071 in worktodo did mean test MM127 but add 110 to the bit levels. Output of the proper kernel range was not coded. Output of the adjusted bit levels was not coded.

frmky · 2012-09-14, 05:18

Code:

no factor for k*2^44+1 from 2^92 to 2^93 (k range: 400T to 700T) [mmff 0.21 mfaktc_barrett96_F32_63gs]
no factor for k*2^44+1 from 2^93 to 2^94 (k range: 0Q to 1Q) [mmff 0.21 mfaktc_barrett96_F32_63gs]

flashjh · 2012-09-14, 13:48

Don't know if you want this here, but here it is:

for assignment MMFactor=127,179,2.5e15

Code:

 
no factor for MM127 from 2^179 to 2^180 (k range: 0 to 2500000000000000) [mmff 0.20mmff mfaktc_barrett183_M127gs]

frmky · 2012-09-14, 18:39

Code:

no factor for k*2^28+1 from 2^76 to 2^77 (k range: 550T to 1000T) [mmff 0.21 mfaktc_barrett89_F0_31gs]
no factor for k*2^28+1 from 2^77 to 2^78 (k range: 550T to 1000T) [mmff 0.21 mfaktc_barrett89_F0_31gs]

Karl M Johnson · 2012-09-15, 16:37

Code:

no factor for MM89 from 2^138 to 2^139 (k range: 500T to 600T) [mmff 0.21 mfaktc_barrett140_M89gs]
no factor for MM89 from 2^139 to 2^140 (k range: 0T to 600T) [mmff 0.21 mfaktc_barrett140_M89gs]

2012-09-13, 18:31	#1
ET_ Banned "Luigi" Aug 2002 Team Italia 11375₈ Posts	Results Please, insert here your results.txt files, so that we'll have a unique place to look to when in doubt. Luigi

2012-09-13, 19:17	#2
rcv Dec 2011 227₈ Posts	Posting here for historic purposes. George's program was not yet ready for the public, but the kernel for MM127 was working fine. George invited me to work on this range. The early kernel kept the GPU so busy, that when run on my primary video card, the video lag / system responsiveness was measured in minutes. I ran this on a secondary card to which no video was connected. Started on about August 22, 2012. Finished on September 10, 2012. (With a software upgrade in the interim.) The work used a dedicated EVGA NVIDIA GTX 570. The actual results.txt line reported is: Code: no factor for M131071 from 2^68 to 2^69 [mfaktc 0.20 barrett92_mul32_gs] In English, the above translates to Code: no factor for MM127 from 2^178 to 2^179 [mfaktc 0.20 barrett92_mul32_gs] While the results line may appear bogus, George didn't yet have the complete input/output interface. "M131071" was code for "MM127". The bit-ranges were adjusted by 110. [That's why the above "translation" is provided.] Last fiddled with by rcv on 2012-09-13 at 19:27 Reason: Emphasizing the test was per George's instructions

2012-09-14, 13:48	#9
flashjh "Jerry" Nov 2011 Vancouver, WA 1,123 Posts	Don't know if you want this here, but here it is: for assignment MMFactor=127,179,2.5e15 Code: no factor for MM127 from 2^179 to 2^180 (k range: 0 to 2500000000000000) [mmff 0.20mmff mfaktc_barrett183_M127gs]

2012-09-15, 16:37	#11
Karl M Johnson Mar 2010 110011011₂ Posts	Code: no factor for MM89 from 2^138 to 2^139 (k range: 500T to 600T) [mmff 0.21 mfaktc_barrett140_M89gs] no factor for MM89 from 2^139 to 2^140 (k range: 0T to 600T) [mmff 0.21 mfaktc_barrett140_M89gs]

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
gfn results	ET_	FermatSearch	12	2021-02-20 03:01
Where have all the TF results gone?...	lycorn	PrimeNet	22	2017-10-02 02:40
PGS Results	danaj	Prime Gap Searches	0	2017-08-14 18:35
CPU Results last 24 hrs	Unregistered	Information & Answers	3	2010-07-26 00:49
0x results...	Mike	PrimeNet	11	2004-05-23 12:55