20180208, 03:38  #12 
Jul 2003
Behind BB
7·257 Posts 
P1 for R6
For the R6 sequence, Mr. Bitcoin, YoYo and I have completed a rather deep sieve.
On my fastest i5 processor cores, the sieve is now removing candidates at less than 1 every 14 hours. On a slower i5 (dual core laptop) processor, P1 factoring removed about 1 out of every 36 candidates. See attached results file. The P1 (via mprime) work removes candidate at a rate of 1 every 11.5 hours (per laptop core). On the fast i5, the LLR tests for these candidates take about 14 hours (again, per core). In a few weeks, I will finish sieving and begin additional testing of P1 and LLR on the faster i5. P1 on this sequence does NOT appear to be a waste of resources. Is there an easy explanation for the factors found by P1? Is the P1 work economical because of the depth of the sieve or because of the size of the tests? 
20180607, 19:10  #13 
Jul 2003
Behind BB
7×257 Posts 
More P1 results for R6
Unfortunately, the (1 out of 36) numbers I posted above were too optimistic. However, P1 continues to make sense for the timeconsuming LLR tests of the R6 sequence. Near n=700,000, LLR tests on my 4 core Haswell take about 180,000 seconds. P1 work finds a factor approximately every 160,000 seconds.
With B1=70,000, the P1 runs took 33 minutes per candidate; on average, one factor was found per 80.6 candidates. With B1=110,000, one factor was found every 50.3 runs. I got lucky with the first 1400 runs and that lead to the 1 out of 36 number previously cited. Results files attached. Please let me know if you have any suggestions or questions. Last fiddled with by masser on 20180607 at 19:12 
20180607, 22:38  #14  
May 2007
Kansas; USA
295F_{16} Posts 
Quote:
I assume you mean near n=7,000,000. I don't know what to do with this. I'm not familiar with P1 testing. Is this removing candidates from testing or are you doing actual testing? Let me know what I should do if anything. Last fiddled with by gd_barnes on 20180607 at 22:38 

20180607, 22:44  #15 
Jul 2003
Behind BB
7·257 Posts 
Doh. You're right; that should have been n=7,000,000.
There's nothing you have to do. I'm just trying to add some data to the P1 discussion. Ultimately, for highn bases, it might become a recommended part of the process: sieve, P1, then test. 
20180607, 22:51  #16  
May 2007
Kansas; USA
7×17×89 Posts 
Quote:
Great thanks for info. The extent of my knowledge of P1 is that I know it needs to be done for very long tests. Obviously 180,000 seconds (>2 days) is a long test. I'll leave it up to the masses to determine when it is necessary for removing candidates before actual testing is done. 

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
New BOINC framework for factoring  jasonp  Factoring  4  20111009 11:24 
BOINC.BE  BATKrikke  Teams  2  20100305 18:57 
Boinc  Xentar  Sierpinski/Riesel Base 5  4  20090425 10:26 
BOINC?  masser  Sierpinski/Riesel Base 5  1  20090209 01:10 
BOINC  bebarce  Software  3  20051215 18:35 