mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Prime Search Projects > Twin Prime Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2010-06-06, 18:03   #1
Historian
 
Historian's Avatar
 
Mar 2010

43 Posts
Default Sieve Benchmark Thread

Let's get the ball rolling on this one.

Processor: Pentium 4 3.4 GHz

tpsieve for the variable n-range: 5M p/sec
tpsieve for a single n: 71.5M p/sec
NewPGen for a single n: 86M p/sec
NewPGen for "Operation Megabit Twin": estimated to be 80 hours for 1T
Historian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-06-06, 18:46   #2
gribozavr
 
gribozavr's Avatar
 
Mar 2005
Internet; Ukraine, Kiev

19716 Posts
Default

CPU: Intel i5-750 (all 4 cores loaded).
tpsieve on x86_64 Linux for n=480000-485000: 108M p/sec.
gribozavr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-06-06, 21:00   #3
mdettweiler
A Sunny Moo
 
mdettweiler's Avatar
 
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)

3·2,083 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Historian View Post
NewPGen for "Operation Megabit Twin": estimated to be 80 hours for 1T
FYI, this converts to 3472222 p/sec, i.e. 3M p/sec since this very rough estimate is only good to one significant figure. (Just to put this in perspective with the other p/sec estimates.)
mdettweiler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-06-07, 00:07   #4
Historian
 
Historian's Avatar
 
Mar 2010

43 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mdettweiler View Post
FYI, this converts to 3472222 p/sec, i.e. 3M p/sec since this very rough estimate is only good to one significant figure. (Just to put this in perspective with the other p/sec estimates.)
From what I've seen, the Megabit Twin project goes through a range of k, not a range of p. So that's ~3.5M k/sec, not 3.5M p/sec.
Historian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-06-07, 00:25   #5
mdettweiler
A Sunny Moo
 
mdettweiler's Avatar
 
Aug 2007
USA (GMT-5)

3·2,083 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Historian View Post
From what I've seen, the Megabit Twin project goes through a range of k, not a range of p. So that's ~3.5M k/sec, not 3.5M p/sec.
Ah, right, I see now...most of the prime search efforts I've worked with deal with relatively small ranges of k, and thus I am used to always having an unqualified reference to the suffix "T" refer to p, not k. Since in this project both values are of magnitudes that can be reasonably referred to in T, I would suggest that in the future qualifiers be used: for example "k=1T" instead of just 1T, leaving the latter (or even better, p=1T) strictly for p references.

Last fiddled with by mdettweiler on 2010-06-07 at 00:26
mdettweiler is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-06-07, 11:49   #6
amphoria
 
amphoria's Avatar
 
"Dave"
Sep 2005
UK

2×19×73 Posts
Default

You can also calculate a rate in p/sec. We are currently sieving to p=100e9 and therefore 80 hours translates to 347k p/sec. Not very fast, but NewPGen has to break a 1T k range into almost 250 pieces until it gets to p=1e9.
amphoria is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-06-07, 17:01   #7
henryzz
Just call me Henry
 
henryzz's Avatar
 
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)

7·19·43 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by amphoria View Post
You can also calculate a rate in p/sec. We are currently sieving to p=100e9 and therefore 80 hours translates to 347k p/sec. Not very fast, but NewPGen has to break a 1T k range into almost 250 pieces until it gets to p=1e9.
It is possible to change the level of the recombine. Just set a limit on the sieve to shortly after you estimate 1/250(I would recommend 1/300 or less in case of mistakes) are remaining. That could in theory mean its possible to combine really early like 1e6 or something like that.
I will do a test now to see vaguely when.
edit: ~p=4e4 would do the trick nicely

Last fiddled with by henryzz on 2010-06-07 at 17:05
henryzz is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-06-07, 18:03   #8
Flatlander
I quite division it
 
Flatlander's Avatar
 
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England

31·67 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by henryzz View Post
It is possible to change the level of the recombine. Just set a limit on the sieve to shortly after you estimate 1/250(I would recommend 1/300 or less in case of mistakes) are remaining. That could in theory mean its possible to combine really early like 1e6 or something like that.
I will do a test now to see vaguely when.
edit: ~p=4e4 would do the trick nicely
You saved me a job.
I was about to do some tests. So, you are suggesting sieving to just 40,000 then again to 100G and it will fit into 485Mb? Just making sure I've got it right.
Flatlander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-06-07, 18:16   #9
Oddball
 
Oddball's Avatar
 
May 2010

49910 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flatlander View Post
You saved me a job.
I was about to do some tests. So, you are suggesting sieving to just 40,000 then again to 100G and it will fit into 485Mb? Just making sure I've got it right.
The default option for NewPGen is to sieve to 1G, then to 100G. I don't know whether it's possible to change it to what you were suggesting.
Oddball is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-06-07, 18:35   #10
Flatlander
I quite division it
 
Flatlander's Avatar
 
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England

40358 Posts
Default

I meant run it once to 40,000 then manually load it again to 100G.
Flatlander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2010-06-07, 19:20   #11
henryzz
Just call me Henry
 
henryzz's Avatar
 
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)

7·19·43 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flatlander View Post
You saved me a job.
I was about to do some tests. So, you are suggesting sieving to just 40,000 then again to 100G and it will fit into 485Mb? Just making sure I've got it right.
That should work. Once each bit is sieved upto the limit set(in Options|Sieve Until in windows) they will be comibined into one file which should be in theory small enougth to fit into 485Mb. I haven't tested this although I have done something like this to combine early(not really early like this) before so I know that bit works. It's the 485Mb bit that I am not so certain over. It depends whether the memory usage is just number of candidates or if it is also effected by distance between candidates etc.
henryzz is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Perpetual benchmark thread... Xyzzy Hardware 821 2020-09-12 23:56
Hardware Benchmark Jest Thread for 100M exponents joblack Hardware 275 2019-08-04 21:07
LLR benchmark thread Oddball Riesel Prime Search 5 2010-08-02 00:11
sr5sieve Benchmark thread axn Sierpinski/Riesel Base 5 25 2010-05-28 23:57
New Sieve Thread Discussion Citrix Prime Sierpinski Project 15 2005-08-29 13:56

All times are UTC. The time now is 07:55.

Fri Sep 18 07:55:46 UTC 2020 up 8 days, 5:06, 0 users, load averages: 1.98, 1.94, 1.73

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.