20201201, 23:43  #1 
Dec 2017
2^{4}×3×5 Posts 
Completion Date Question?
Current date: December 1, 2020 I just downloaded and am using the latest software! Well based on my digital root theory I picked a number which indicated to me a chance to be Mprime and the number no one has factored here at Mersenne Org. I believe it is a untested number, because I checked it out and it had no factors. I'm currently testing it as I type. I have a question about the completion date as it is a PRP World Record number if found to be Mprime. The number does not have that many digits. I tweaked my Semiprime & Prime Generator with (2**p1) and I believe that the exponent numbers that end with 3 are special which produce Mprimes and also its the only 3 in the number. You will have to do some research with the code to see what I see for the digital root for the production exponent prime number. Back to my Question I know I'm an odd ball The report says it will finish February 24, 2023. My question is, will I at least know anything about the number before 2/24/23 which would hint that the number could be an Mprime if it is? Is there a quick test prior to the completion date that would set off a bios alarm like in 6 weeks or a month from now if the trial factoring finds no factors and therefore Mprime? Well with more research others have attempted this number but quit it. no factors though. The underline one is my result just in: NF no factor from 2^72 to 2^73 ___________________________ NF no factor from 2^71 to 2^72 NF no factor from 2^70 to 2^71 NF no factor from 2^69 to 2^70 NF no factor from 2^68 to 2^69 NF no factor from 2^67 to 2^68 NF no factor from 2^66 to 2^67 NF no factor from 2^65 to 2^66 NF no factor from 2^64 to 2^65 NF no factor from 2^63 to 2^64 Last fiddled with by ONeil on 20201202 at 00:01 
20201201, 23:57  #2 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
1000111111100_{2} Posts 
Trial factoring is not how a prime is discovered. You can run all the trial factoring you want on your candidate, and the info you gain does not meaningfully change the chance your candidate is prime.
Until the prp test is complete, you have no information about primality if anything else were the case, why would we run the prp test at all? Do you have the patience and discipline to spend over 2 years on a single task? Can you assign a faster machine to the task to reduce that time? 2 years is far far longer than most machines would take. Maybe you have the wrong software, too. 
20201202, 01:02  #3  
6809 > 6502
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts
2^{3}·31·37 Posts 
Quote:
For the OP's info: M104023427 that is 2^{104023427}1 has 31,314,172 decimal digits and requires 414.18 GHzDays of work to complete the PRP test. M332,192,897 has 100,000,027 decimal digits and takes about 4,941 GHzdays of work to test. M999,999,937 has 301,029,977 decimal digits and took about 47,431 GHzdays of work to test. So, maybe you don't understand the size of the number your exponent represents. 

20201202, 01:30  #4  
Dec 2017
2^{4}·3·5 Posts 
Quote:
What does 1 GHzday equal in actual time? Is it 1Ghzday=24hours???? 

20201202, 02:03  #5 
6809 > 6502
"""""""""""""""""""
Aug 2003
101×103 Posts
21730_{8} Posts 
Roughly, how many cores does your CPU have and at what rate does it run?
4 cores x 3 GHz x 1 day = 12 GHzDays, approx. 
20201202, 02:07  #6 
"TF79LL86GIMPS96gpu17"
Mar 2017
US midwest
4842_{10} Posts 
Glossary is here
There is not an equivalence for modern processors of GHzD/day rating = core count x clock frequency. Only a very rough guide. For example, a 6core i78750H running ~2.2Ghz would be 13.2 GHzD/Day from that formula. Per https://www.mersenneforum.org/showpo...51&postcount=3, depending on what's running, it produced differing throughputs of 19.31, 23.44, or 20.05 GHzD/day. That's an FMA3 processor design. Other designs will achieve higher or lower throughputs per coreclock product. Very old processors can be many times slower than coreclock product would predict. Software efficiency and input parameters also vary the throughput. Last fiddled with by kriesel on 20201202 at 02:35 
20201202, 02:12  #7  
Romulan Interpreter
Jun 2011
Thailand
23A9_{16} Posts 
Quote:
As most current processors have 4 (or more) cores and they run at 3 (or more) GHz, you will spend about 24/(4*3)=2 hours (or less) to get the same 1 GHzDay of work done. In fact, you will spend less than that, because, unless you run a VERY old x86 rig, your processor it is at least an i3, which is a 64 bit processor, and does few operations faster than the "classics". Anyhow, the best way is to run a benchmark from your P95 or Mprime program and see how many iterations and GHzDays your rig produces, to have an idea, before starting a 20years job (somebody already mentioned similar thoughts). You then make the calculation, you should be good with numbers, judging from the graphs you post here and there... Last fiddled with by LaurV on 20201202 at 02:14 

20201202, 02:13  #8  
Dec 2017
2^{4}·3·5 Posts 
Quote:
I just found another number though 8 digits and its smaller its says its a double check! Does that mean I will not get credit if its Mprime? 

20201202, 03:06  #9  
Dec 2017
2^{4}·3·5 Posts 
Anyone out there Don't waste your time on double checks
Don't bother with Double Checks when a residue your just a slave...period Quote:


20201202, 03:31  #10 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
2^{2}×1,151 Posts 
Well, at least your position is consistent with your coding don't double check anything, just throw it out there without care for accuracy.
You wouldn't want to know if your computer works properly anyway... ignorance is bliss. 
Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
What does 'expected completion date' even mean?  fivemack  PrimeNet  7  20151015 22:59 
ETA VS Expected Completion Date  QuickCoder  Information & Answers  2  20140905 00:19 
Completion Date prediction Based on 24/7 Estimate?  Unregistered  Information & Answers  3  20091121 23:57 
Accuracy of completion date estimates?  kdq  Software  4  20081004 05:02 
Expected Completion Date  Orgasmic Troll  Software  4  20030719 02:08 