mersenneforum.org  

Go Back   mersenneforum.org > Factoring Projects > Lone Mersenne Hunters

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 2020-10-19, 19:20   #12
gLauss
 
Nov 2014

3×13 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by VBCurtis View Post
Curves at B1=50k could still find a factor, but B1=250k will have more than 5x the chance per curve (while taking about 5x as long, so odds-per-day improve).
I know. If you take a look, I did put more total effort into B1=250k curves than B1=50k. However, I ran only a few of them. According to the report_ecm, what I did in total is equivalent to 170 curves of t25. I think it is kind of unlikely for this number to have a factor less than 30 digits because of the very large P-1 bounds, too. And t35 is way beyond what I'm willing to spend on this stupid task
gLauss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-20, 08:50   #13
Viliam Furik
 
Viliam Furik's Avatar
 
"Viliam Furík"
Jul 2018
Martin, Slovakia

10111010102 Posts
Default TFed to 78bits

I TFed the M20825573 to 78 bits, 79 is on the way. So far, no factor.
Viliam Furik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2020-10-20, 20:18   #14
gLauss
 
Nov 2014

1001112 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Viliam Furik View Post
I TFed the M20825573 to 78 bits, 79 is on the way. So far, no factor.
Hihi, thanks for that! My laptop GPU is too crappy for this bitlevels. However, I assume your chances for success are quite low because of the large P-1 and the ECM curves I already ran. I won't continue on this number for now, back to boring PRP testing...
gLauss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-10-29, 09:31   #15
Zhangrc
 
"University student"
May 2021
Beijing, China

2·101 Posts
Default Factoring M19491001

I'd like to factor M19491001, just because the way it looks.
I did TF to 2^75 and dozens of ECM curves because I noticed that a prior P-1 has been done. So far, no factor was found.
Should I do P+1 or try P-1 with larger bounds?
Zhangrc is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-10-29, 14:24   #16
VBCurtis
 
VBCurtis's Avatar
 
"Curtis"
Feb 2005
Riverside, CA

7·11·67 Posts
Default

I wouldn't do another P-1 until I'd finished the B1 = 50k ECM level. I'd do a few curves at B1=250k also before repeating P-1.

If I did another P-1. I'd increase the bounds by 10x or so. You have to re-do all the work of the previous P-1, so increasing bounds just a little bit means you're mostly wasting work (and thus that there are better ways to use those cycles).

P+1 seems like a reasonable choice- again, pick big bounds- big enough that you won't be tempted to try even-bigger ones later. How big to pick depends quite a bit on how much effort you want to spend on this factoring effort- completing the B1=50k level is non-trivial, but completing the B1=250k level is a pretty serious effort. If you intend to go that far, choose bigger P+1 (and maybe P-1) bounds than would normally be reasonable.
VBCurtis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-10-29, 14:39   #17
Viliam Furik
 
Viliam Furik's Avatar
 
"Viliam Furík"
Jul 2018
Martin, Slovakia

2·373 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zhangrc View Post
I'd like to factor M19491001, just because the way it looks.
I did TF to 2^75 and dozens of ECM curves because I noticed that a prior P-1 has been done. So far, no factor was found.
Should I do P+1 or try P-1 with larger bounds?
I wanted to go do TF on my new RTX 3080, but it seems I need a new version of mfaktc, compiled for CUDA runtime v11.40. So I'll do it on my RTX 2080Ti. 75 to 78 bits. See you tomorrow.
Viliam Furik is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-11-25, 22:46   #18
gLauss
 
Nov 2014

3910 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by VBCurtis View Post
If I did another P-1. I'd increase the bounds by 10x or so. You have to re-do all the work of the previous P-1, so increasing bounds just a little bit means you're mostly wasting work (and thus that there are better ways to use those cycles).

P+1 seems like a reasonable choice- again, pick big bounds- big enough that you won't be tempted to try even-bigger ones later.
As I am stuck with "my number" and don't want to waste full t30 level, I will now run a P-1 with B1=15M and then two P+1 with B1=7.5M for 19491001. Let's see if I get lucky...
gLauss is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2021-11-25, 23:14   #19
Prime95
P90 years forever!
 
Prime95's Avatar
 
Aug 2002
Yeehaw, FL

777410 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by gLauss View Post
As I am stuck with "my number" and don't want to waste full t30 level, I will now run a P-1 with B1=15M and then two P+1 with B1=7.5M for 19491001. Let's see if I get lucky...
Stop! Investigate v30.8. Wait for a future version before trying P+1.
Prime95 is online now   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
OpenCL GPU P-1 Factoring and ECM Factoring xx005fs GPU Computing 3 2018-10-27 14:49

All times are UTC. The time now is 04:59.


Sun Jan 23 04:59:02 UTC 2022 up 183 days, 23:28, 0 users, load averages: 1.15, 1.13, 1.18

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, 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.

≠ ± ∓ ÷ × · − √ ‰ ⊗ ⊕ ⊖ ⊘ ⊙ ≤ ≥ ≦ ≧ ≨ ≩ ≺ ≻ ≼ ≽ ⊏ ⊐ ⊑ ⊒ ² ³ °
∠ ∟ ° ≅ ~ ‖ ⟂ ⫛
≡ ≜ ≈ ∝ ∞ ≪ ≫ ⌊⌋ ⌈⌉ ∘ ∏ ∐ ∑ ∧ ∨ ∩ ∪ ⨀ ⊕ ⊗ 𝖕 𝖖 𝖗 ⊲ ⊳
∅ ∖ ∁ ↦ ↣ ∩ ∪ ⊆ ⊂ ⊄ ⊊ ⊇ ⊃ ⊅ ⊋ ⊖ ∈ ∉ ∋ ∌ ℕ ℤ ℚ ℝ ℂ ℵ ℶ ℷ ℸ 𝓟
¬ ∨ ∧ ⊕ → ← ⇒ ⇐ ⇔ ∀ ∃ ∄ ∴ ∵ ⊤ ⊥ ⊢ ⊨ ⫤ ⊣ … ⋯ ⋮ ⋰ ⋱
∫ ∬ ∭ ∮ ∯ ∰ ∇ ∆ δ ∂ ℱ ℒ ℓ
𝛢𝛼 𝛣𝛽 𝛤𝛾 𝛥𝛿 𝛦𝜀𝜖 𝛧𝜁 𝛨𝜂 𝛩𝜃𝜗 𝛪𝜄 𝛫𝜅 𝛬𝜆 𝛭𝜇 𝛮𝜈 𝛯𝜉 𝛰𝜊 𝛱𝜋 𝛲𝜌 𝛴𝜎 𝛵𝜏 𝛶𝜐 𝛷𝜙𝜑 𝛸𝜒 𝛹𝜓 𝛺𝜔