20120901, 18:19  #1 
Aug 2012
11001_{2} Posts 
Prime finding rate, Sierp vs. Riesel?
Has anyone done analysis of whether the prime finding rate is higher for Sierp or Riesel?
The most appropriate comparison, I think, would be to look at bases with the same conjecture, and then look at the distribution of k's remaining at a given n level. Though same bases with different conjectures might be fine as well (especially if you only consider k's < the min conjecture). Different bases, different conjectures might be worthwhile, but that seems like the least appropriate of comparisons. If there's data someone can send me, I'd be happy to investigate myself. The question I'm trying to answer is: "Does it appear to be easier to find primes for S or R conjectures?" If it does look like there's a (reasonably) clear winner, it will affect the type of work I choose going forward. 
20120901, 20:06  #2  
May 2008
Wilmington, DE
2^{2}·23·31 Posts 
Quote:
Testing times are similar based on n. The test times do increase for the same n for higher bases. I'm assuming you are running on Windows. Do you know if your machines are Sandy Bridge architecture? 

20120901, 21:10  #3 
Just call me Henry
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)
3·5·383 Posts 
Which of Riesel or Sierp has more algebraic factors? I imagine algebraic factors would scue the stats a little.

20120901, 23:20  #4 
"Mark"
Apr 2003
Between here and the
3^{2}·23·29 Posts 

20120902, 17:03  #5 
Aug 2012
5^{2} Posts 
Yes, I'm on Windows. I've got an AMD Phenom II quadcore desktop, an i5 quadcore laptop, and then an AMD Athlon II dualcore laptop. Unsure how those correspond to Sandy Bridge.

20120902, 17:19  #6  
May 2008
Wilmington, DE
2^{2}·23·31 Posts 
Quote:
Last fiddled with by MyDogBuster on 20120902 at 17:27 

20120902, 19:35  #7  
Just call me Henry
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)
3·5·383 Posts 
Quote:
@CGKIII Do you mean an i7 quadcore laptop or i5 quadcore desktop? All i5 laptops are dualcore not quad. :) Not that this matters. 

20120902, 23:21  #8 
Aug 2012
5^{2} Posts 
Henryzz, the laptop says "Intel(R) Core(TM) i5 CPU M 560 @ 2.67 GHz," 2.66 GHz, 3.42 GB of RAM. When I pop open the Task Manager, go to the Performance tab, it shows four slots four CPU usage. I get ~25% usage per active client. Not sure if there's a better place for me to be looking. It's a Dell Latitude E6410.
I have llrexe =cllr.exe, using cllr.exe from the crus_pack in one of the intro threads. 
20120903, 00:54  #9  
Basketry That Evening!
"Bunslow the Bold"
Jun 2011
40<A<43 89<O<88
3×2,399 Posts 
Quote:


20120903, 08:55  #10  
Just call me Henry
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)
3·5·383 Posts 
Quote:


20120903, 14:25  #11 
Romulan Interpreter
Jun 2011
Thailand
8932_{10} Posts 
With P95 you don't need to turn off nothing, just launch only 2 workers. The program is enough clever to use the right affinity. To make sure, you can use the option/benchmark function and see if any improvement 2 workers against 4 workers, most probably not, and 4 workers may be even slower for higher expos, due to memory bandwidth limit.

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Riesel/Sierp base 2 evenk/evenn/oddn testing  gd_barnes  Conjectures 'R Us  424  20201125 03:32 
Mersenne prime discovery rate  davieddy  PrimeNet  0  20121126 03:26 
Riesel and Sierp numbers bases <= 1024  R. Gerbicz  Conjectures 'R Us  22  20091229 20:21 
Sieving Riesel & Sierp base 16  gd_barnes  Conjectures 'R Us  13  20091214 09:23 
Riesel/Sierp #'s for bases 3, 7, and 15  Siemelink  Conjectures 'R Us  105  20090904 06:40 