20201117, 06:13  #1  
Feb 2019
China
59 Posts 
How can I run PRP test?
Quote:
how long does it cost ? 

20201117, 06:41  #2 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
3·19·83 Posts 
LLR, or pfgw. Time taken depends rather heavily on hardware, just like it does for Prime95.
A prp test is about the same speed as what P95 would take on that same size of exponent. 
20201117, 06:43  #3 
Apr 2010
Over the rainbow
4751_{8} Posts 
at this size, primo isn't practical

20201117, 16:18  #4 
Nov 2016
101100000100_{2} Posts 

20201117, 16:56  #5  
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA
3·19·83 Posts 
Quote:
Maybe you should run that Primo proof yourself it's just 25% or so more digits than the current record holder. Shouldn't take you long, right? 

20201117, 21:23  #6 
"Sam"
Nov 2016
2×163 Posts 
I would happily certify it if I had the resources. Unfortunately for Primo (which can run about 64 concurrent tasks at a time), the time complexity for certifying N prime is at least O(ln(N)^4). I had asked about how long it would take to run some time ago.
In A PM, I was given these averages times for certifying a 25k digit number. 64 cores (22.5 days) 32 cores (45 days) 16 cores (3 months) 8 cores (6 months) 4 cores (1 year) So for 50k digits, we have 64 cores (360 days) Almost a year!!! 32 cores (720 days) 16 cores (1440 days) 8 cores (2880 days) 4 cores (5760 days) At best, you could probably certify R49081 in just a little under a year. 
20201124, 17:03  #7 
Jun 2009
683 Posts 
Primo has a builtin limit on the candidate size. Marcel Martin increases the limit from time to time as better hardware allows for bigger tests. At the moment the limit is 132,928 bits which is about 40,000 decimal digits. So at least for now, no chance. Maybe in a future update it will be possible to certify R49081.
PS: on the other hand that means the next three numbers in the probable primes thread are now within the primo limit but with numbers that close to the theoretical limit there is still a chance of primo being unable to provide a proof. Last fiddled with by PuzzlePeter on 20201124 at 17:17 
20201124, 17:21  #8 
Sep 2002
Database er0rr
3617_{10} Posts 

20201125, 14:27  #9 
Jun 2009
1010101011_{2} Posts 

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
I found the primality test, there seems to be no composite numbers that pass the test  sweety439  sweety439  7  20200211 19:49 
Modifying the Lucas Lehmer Primality Test into a fast test of nothing  Trilo  Miscellaneous Math  25  20180311 23:20 
Double check LL test faster than first run test  lidocorc  Software  3  20081203 15:12 
Will the torture test, test ALL available memory?  swinster  Software  2  20071201 17:54 
A primality test for Fermat numbers faster than Pépin's test ?  T.Rex  Math  0  20041026 21:37 