20140901, 17:18  #188 
"Serge"
Mar 2008
Phi(4,2^7658614+1)/2
59·157 Posts 

20140901, 17:42  #189 
ἀβουλία
"Mr. Meeseeks"
Jan 2012
California, USA
3^{2}·241 Posts 
I'll TF 9100919 another bit for fun...

20140901, 17:46  #190  
Bamboozled!
"𒉺𒌌𒇷𒆷𒀭"
May 2003
Down not across
2×3×1,753 Posts 
Quote:
As to your followup: not pointless but less efficient than using the larger value. 

20140901, 19:59  #191 
Just call me Henry
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)
5·19·61 Posts 
If you are definitely planning on running for example 35 digit ecm then there is no point in running ecm at lower bounds.
The reason we normally do are that it is slower to search for 30 digit factors at 1e6(35 digit bounds) than 25e4. If there is a 30 digit factor that completes the factorization then that means time is wasted. The chances of that happening here are very small. 
20140902, 00:38  #192 
Aug 2002
Dawn of the Dead
11101011_{2} Posts 
That is indeed the case  I hadn't checked that. Sigma=7053813379423454 and Sigma=5700725959011386 both find the same factor, 9662183525912193406922912529583, for M27529. So no worries then.

20140903, 08:49  #193 
"Victor de Hollander"
Aug 2011
the Netherlands
2^{3}×3×7^{2} Posts 
According to ECM progress page, the equivalent of 280 curves with B1=50,000 have now been completed on M7508981.

20140909, 13:58  #194 
"Victor de Hollander"
Aug 2011
the Netherlands
498_{16} Posts 
11 curves B1=1e6
Code:
[Tue Sep 02 21:04:30 2014] UID: VictordeHollander/PCVICTOR, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx [Wed Sep 03 10:26:05 2014] UID: VictordeHollander/PCVICTOR, M7508981 completed 3 ECM curves, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx [Wed Sep 03 15:57:28 2014] UID: VictordeHollander/PCVICTOR, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx Code:
[Wed Sep 03 00:12:20 2014] UID: VictordeHollander/PC3770K, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx [Wed Sep 03 00:53:46 2014] UID: VictordeHollander/PC3770K, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx [Wed Sep 03 21:04:54 2014] UID: VictordeHollander/PC3770K, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx [Wed Sep 03 22:33:29 2014] UID: VictordeHollander/PC3770K, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx [Thu Sep 04 18:23:58 2014] UID: VictordeHollander/PC3770K, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx [Thu Sep 04 19:54:59 2014] UID: VictordeHollander/PC3770K, M7508981 completed 1 ECM curve, B1=1000000, B2=100000000, We4: xxxxxxxx http://www.mersenne.org/report_expon...7508981&full=1 but Mersenne.ca is only displaying 3 of my 11 curves. Are the 1 curve results not reported to the mersenne.ca page? http://www.mersenne.ca/exponent.php?...etails=7508981 
20140909, 17:58  #195  
Nov 2003
2^{2}·5·373 Posts 
Quote:


20140909, 19:13  #196 
Bamboozled!
"𒉺𒌌𒇷𒆷𒀭"
May 2003
Down not across
2×3×1,753 Posts 

20140909, 23:24  #197 
May 2013
East. Always East.
11×157 Posts 
What exactly drives you to interject so often? I think it's clear enough that people here are having a good time (read: fun) contributing a bit of computing power to an exponent with many factors for no particular reason.
This has all been primarily for the enjoyment. People are using their own hardware as they please. I for one am getting sick of your negativity. None of your posts have generated any enjoyment. I request that you leave this discussion, Robert. Last fiddled with by TheMawn on 20140909 at 23:25 
20140910, 01:07  #198  
Nov 2008
3×167 Posts 
Quote:
Why, take for the instance the thread the other day other optimising TF code for cpu's. In the RDS universe that would add absolutely nothing to the project  slight paraphrase but that's the gist. When it was pointed out to him that finding a factor with TF removes the need for an LL test and that therefore he was demonstrably wrong he wandered off into some other fantasy land and tried to reframe his question as he had been caught out. Quick quiz, which of these 3 outcomes add to the project? The proposed new member to the project doesn't have a high end gpu and is only interested in factoring on the cpu and nothing else. 1. CPU does anything other than work on GIMPS 2. CPU does TF with non optimised code 3. CPU does TF with optimised code Of course it's 3 then 2. Unless you're RDS of course in which case options 2 & 3 are a waste of resources. Yours truly  The Village Idiot 

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
New P+1 record factor  akruppa  Factoring  5  20071101 16:47 
Greg Childers finds Record P+1 Factor  wblipp  ElevenSmooth  9  20051227 20:18 
Record ECM factor found  philmoore  Factoring  10  20050227 09:38 
ECM Server for Record Size Factors at 8195  wblipp  ElevenSmooth  1  20031125 15:47 
Record ECM factor found by Prime95  philmoore  Lounge  0  20030624 20:41 