20210925, 04:17  #1 
"University student"
May 2021
Beijing, China
11010000_{2} Posts 
Trial factoring to > 2^77?
Nowadays people mainly do trial factoring in the twok project (which I have very little interest), and GPU72 is releasing TF assignments to 2^76 and seems very reluctant to give any higher bounds. However, there are hundreds of thousands of unfactored exponents in the 107119M range
. So I suggest doing trial factoring to higher than 2^77, starting from 107M. My reasons are as follows: 1. Currently most of the GIMPSChina members, such as arpcar, 1997rj7, Neutron3529 and I are doing wavefront factoring, but out throughput is rather small, so more help is welcome. 2. Even excluding SRBase and TJAOI, the trial factoring progress is currently at a rate of 1e8 GHZd/year, while the rate of PRP tests is at 5e7 GHZd/year. (If only half of the people focused on PRP wavefront, we would have done to 2^78.) And there are about 140,000 exponents waiting for TF, with approximately 140 GHZd per exponent, so they add up to 2e7 GHZd. These could be finished in less than a year. 3. Some ranges, like 108.3M, has 2098 unfactored exponents. If we do no more TF and use normal P1 bounds (4% chance of a factor), Those ranges will eventually enter the twok project. At that time, we could save no more PRP (maybe except for a few LL DCs) by finding a factor. It's definitely better to do it now. 4. Many people prefer TF over PRP on their GPUs for many reasons. Not only because TF earn credit faster, but it also takes up very little disk space (2MB) and writes checkpoints frequently (so less work lost) and easier to setup. If we only focus on recommended bounds, there will be a time when some people have to do TF far away from the wavefront or doing nothing at all. 
20210925, 05:08  #2 
"Tucker Kao"
Jan 2020
Head Base M168202123
2^{5}×3×7 Posts 
It'll be the best if other users have done the P1 factoring from M107M to M119M first(B1=1,000,000 and B2=40,000,000 if possible), then ask the SRBase group to run every exponents up to 2^77 or 2^78.
The P1 factoring are way faster in Prime 30.5 and 30.6 than ever before. The chance that they can score the FPM1 is almost quadruple timewise higher than the TF from 2^76 to 2^78 per result entry. They can follow the minimum recommended P1 bounds too, do in the order like M120202123 which I continued TheJudger's factoring for an aftermath upgrade. Last fiddled with by tuckerkao on 20210925 at 05:25 
20210925, 07:48  #3  
"University student"
May 2021
Beijing, China
2^{4}×13 Posts 
Quote:
Quote:
Taking M109999993 for example: If it has been TFed to 2^76, then run P1 with B1=700000 and B2=26000000, we get 65.9117% probability. If it has been TFed to 2^77, then to get ~65.9117% probability, we only need to run B1=400000 and B2=10000000, getting 65.9167% probability and saving 7.4GHZdays per exponent. Last fiddled with by Zhangrc on 20210925 at 08:01 

20210925, 08:02  #4  
"Tucker Kao"
Jan 2020
Head Base M168202123
2A0_{16} Posts 
Quote:
The higher trial factoring depth should be balanced with the larger P1 bounds. I'm running P1 with B1 = 1,000,000 and B2 = 40,000,000 with TFs up to 2^78 all the time. If I want my TFs to go up to 2^79, then B1 = 1,600,000 and B2 = 65,000,000. When work the TFs up to 2^80, B1 = 1,900,000 and B2 = 90,000,000. Last fiddled with by tuckerkao on 20210925 at 08:08 

20210925, 08:08  #5  
"University student"
May 2021
Beijing, China
2^{4}×13 Posts 
Quote:
You are referring to your 168,***,*23, I suppose? 

20210925, 08:10  #6  
"Tucker Kao"
Jan 2020
Head Base M168202123
2^{5}·3·7 Posts 
Quote:
I'm running P1 on M115173323, the P1 with B1 = 700,000 and B2 = 26,000,000 will only cost 8 hours on my machine. TF from 2^76 to 2^77 will cost 132.88 GHz days on GPU TF from 2^77 to 2^78 will cost 265.76 GHz days on GPU Ask ViliamF, he has a lot of more experience than I do, that was what he told me. Apply the corresponding higher P1 bounds if raise the TF bits. Last fiddled with by tuckerkao on 20210925 at 08:18 

20210925, 08:15  #7 
"University student"
May 2021
Beijing, China
D0_{16} Posts 
That's my point: They have all been done months before, and if we still focus on these "recommended" bounds, we might have nothing to do (TF at the PRP wavefront) in the future.
Last fiddled with by Zhangrc on 20210925 at 08:17 
20210925, 08:28  #8  
"Tucker Kao"
Jan 2020
Head Base M168202123
2^{5}×3×7 Posts 
Quote:
However the GPU prices are skyrocketing recently, I'd rather to buy AMD Ryzen 5950X than Nvidia Geforce 3070 Ti if only 1 choice but not the other. Quote:
P1 with B1 = 1,000,000 and B2 = 40,000,000 of M168M are 36% slower to complete than the same 2 bounds for M115M. Last fiddled with by tuckerkao on 20210925 at 08:36 

20210925, 08:36  #9 
"University student"
May 2021
Beijing, China
2^{4}×13 Posts 

20210925, 08:38  #10  
"Tucker Kao"
Jan 2020
Head Base M168202123
672_{10} Posts 
Quote:
It's impossible to only use GPUs to run P1, it'll consume certain amount of CPU computations with GPUOwl as well. Quote:
I've gotten 4 FPM1: M168173323, M168830323, M168860123, M168926123 so far. Only 1 factor from 2^76 to 2^77 M168101891 was reported from another user in the same range. Last fiddled with by tuckerkao on 20210925 at 09:26 

20210925, 08:42  #11 
"University student"
May 2021
Beijing, China
2^{4}×13 Posts 

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Trial Factoring on AMD/ATI GPU's?  Stargate38  GPU Computing  9  20180831 07:58 
What is Trial Factoring?  Unregistered  Information & Answers  5  20120802 03:47 
How far to do trial factoring  S485122  PrimeNet  1  20070906 00:52 
over trial factoring  JFB  Software  23  20040822 05:37 
How to only do Trial Factoring?  michael  Software  23  20040106 08:54 