20090509, 08:58  #199 
Nov 2008
2×3^{3}×43 Posts 
Yamato,
Both of your 6.2.3 Win32 binaries crash on my Win32 P4 @ 1.7GHz. After about a second, I get "ecm.exe has encountered a problem and needs to close". My computer is running Windows XP and is nearly 7 years old. Could this be anything to do with it? 
20090509, 12:04  #200  
Sep 2005
Berlin
2·3·11 Posts 
Quote:


20090509, 13:31  #201 
Einyen
Dec 2003
Denmark
2^{2}·757 Posts 
I have a pentium4 binary. GMPECM 6.2.3 with GMP 4.3.0 compiled with Mingw on a Pentium4 Prescott:
Without enableasmredc: ecm623p4p.zip With enableasmredc: ecm623p4pasmredc.zip asmredc is faster up to 190200 digit numbers for 32bit version. Last fiddled with by ATH on 20090509 at 13:31 
20100220, 17:59  #202  
Aug 2002
1015_{8} Posts 
Quote:
Brian Gladman's Win64AMD64 Code:
GMPECM 6.2.3 [powered by GMP 4.2.1_MPIR_1.1.1] [ECM] Input number is (303 digits) Using B1=11000000, B2=35133391030, polynomial Dickson(12), sigma=30748183 Step 1 took 103288ms Step 2 took 51699ms GMPECM 6.2.3 [powered by GMP 4.2.1_MPIR_1.1.1] [ECM] Input number is (303 digits) Using B1=43000000, B2=240490660426, polynomial Dickson(12), sigma=867940428 Step 1 took 406008ms Step 2 took 160557ms Code:
GMPECM 6.2.3 [powered by GMP 4.2.1_MPIR_1.1.1] [ECM] Input number is (303 digits) Using B1=11000000, B2=35133391030, polynomial Dickson(12), sigma=4047765977 Step 1 took 104005ms Step 2 took 51496ms GMPECM 6.2.3 [powered by GMP 4.2.1_MPIR_1.1.1] [ECM] Input number is (303 digits) Using B1=43000000, B2=240490660426, polynomial Dickson(12), sigma=2393316774 Step 1 took 405181ms Step 2 took 160276ms Code:
GMPECM 6.2.3 [powered by GMP 4.3.0] [ECM] Input number is (303 digits) Using MODMULN Using B1=11000000, B2=30114149530, polynomial Dickson(30), sigma=3111830617 dF=36864, k=2, d=371280, d2=11, i0=19 Step 1 took 441452ms Step 2 took 142600ms GMPECM 6.2.3 [powered by GMP 4.3.0] [ECM] Input number is (303 digits) Using MODMULN Using B1=43000000, B2=198654756318, polynomial Dickson(30), sigma=1316417087 dF=92160, k=2, d=1021020, d2=19, i0=24 Step 1 took 1729349ms Step 2 took 369317ms 

20100812, 23:40  #203  
Sep 2008
Kansas
2·1,637 Posts 
Quote:
Like ECM 6.3 & GMP 5.0.1 

20100916, 21:09  #204 
Sep 2005
Berlin
2×3×11 Posts 
A binary optimised for Intel Core i7/i5/i3 processors: ecm63_win64_corei.
There is no real difference to the core2builds. 
20100930, 09:47  #205 
Aug 2002
Termonfeckin, IE
3×919 Posts 
I tried Jeff's Win64 Core2 version and Yamato's corei binary posted above. This is on a Win7 64bit machine. There has to be something wrong because it takes way too long. I ran both overnight and not even stage1 completed for a 1.7 million digit Mersenne number using B1=50,000 and B2=6,778,500. What gives?

20101002, 19:40  #206  
Sep 2005
Berlin
1000010_{2} Posts 
Quote:


20101003, 19:54  #207 
Aug 2002
Termonfeckin, IE
3·919 Posts 
Then how does Prime95 finish the run in a few hours? Is your binary not compiled with gwnum?

20101005, 11:09  #208 
Einyen
Dec 2003
Denmark
2^{2}×757 Posts 
I'm not sure, but I think GMPECM is not suited for numbers of this size like Prime95 is.
Stage1 in Prime95 on M5647219 (1.7 million digits) takes under 1 hour with 2 cores on a "Core2 Duo (Conroe) E6750 2.66Ghz". 
20101005, 14:24  #209 
Aug 2002
Termonfeckin, IE
3·919 Posts 
I guess Prime95 uses FFTs whereas GMP_ECM uses some other general big number library which is much slower.

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Project Links  masser  Sierpinski/Riesel Base 5  25  20111126 09:21 
Links to Precompiled Msieve versions  wblipp  Msieve  0  20110717 20:59 
Links  davieddy  Information & Answers  9  20101008 14:27 
Links question  ET_  PrimeNet  0  20080126 09:35 
Links.  Xyzzy  Forum Feedback  2  20070318 02:17 