On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Will Prime95 be rewritten to run on the Itanium, when it comes out? Seems to
> me like 64-bit operation will speed it up significantly, as will the insane
> amount of registers and floating point units and all the other
> microprocessor
> w
TeamG:
Trying to start a PrimeHunt on a Linux box, but can't find the Gnome
switch/requeste(o)r to get the screen resolution down enough so I can read without
a microscope. Can anyone help? Am running Redhat 6.1 with a VooDoo
3500 GFX card.
So until last year I thought Linux was a cartoon ch
Williamette is the next-generation x86 architecture machine. It has (will
have) a way accelerated CPU clock and even more instructions execute in
fewer clocks, but it has a deeper pipeline and increased instruction
latency. First generation Williamettes are supposedly going to debut around
1.2GH
Will Prime95 be rewritten to run on the Itanium, when it comes out? Seems to
me like 64-bit operation will speed it up significantly, as will the insane
amount of registers and floating point units and all the other
microprocessor
whatnot that I'm not current on. A review (thanks, Stefan
<>
Remind me what a Willamette is again. All I know about are Merced (I mean,
Itanium), and the second-generation Itanium called McKinley.
STL
_
Unsubscribe & list info -- http://www.scruz.net/~luke/signup.htm
Mersenne Prime FAQ
Jeff Woods wrote:
>>being found. Currently, all exponents thru Prime95's limit of
>>79.3M have been factored to at least 2^50... If a factor is
>>found for an exponent, it's eliminated from further testing
>>of any kind.
>
>Isn't the factor itself verified?
Yes, it is. However, at least in the
On Sat, 17 Jun 2000, Michael Bell wrote:
> Warning on K6's: As far as GIMPS is concerned they're not too good, because
> the FPU is about half the speed of the Intel Pentium FPU. (If you run RC5
> then they're as good, if not better, because they have very good integer
> units).
K6 is not good
On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 17:28:52 +0200 (CEST), Henrik Olsen wrote:
>On Sat, 17 Jun 2000, Lem Novantotto wrote:
>> On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 05:37:06 -0400, in Mersenne_mailing_list you
>> wrote:
>> >Is all your hard work(and subsequent credit) lost? No, although the server
>> >has already re-assigned them
Michael Bell wrote:
> ...back to your 37pence/MHz figure. Also note memory prices have gone up, so
> 32M now costs about £40-50!! Maybe this is the first time in recent history
> the price of a computer has stabilised??
Hmm, dont think so. I was over at Fry's electronics this morning. The 40
On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 17:28:52 +0200 (CEST), in Mersenne_mailing_list
you wrote:
>On Sat, 17 Jun 2000, Lem Novantotto wrote:
>> Hi!
>> I think it would be nice to post the mersenne numbers you're still
>> working to, and that have been reassigned, so, hopefully, the new
>> tester can read them and s
>From: Jeff Woods <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: Mersenne: Factoring Assignments: Are They Always
>"First-Time?"
>Date: Sat, 17 Jun 2000 17:14:00 -0400
>
>At 01:00 PM 6/17/00 -0700, you wrote:
(snip)
>>If a factor is
>>found for an exponent, it's eliminated from furt
Mersenne DigestSaturday, June 17 2000Volume 01 : Number 748
--
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2000 22:59:27 +0200
From: "Martijn Kruithof" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Mersenne: Assignment "stolen"
Hi,
It is a first
At 01:00 PM 6/17/00 -0700, you wrote:
>being found. Currently, all exponents thru Prime95's limit of
>79.3M have been factored to at least 2^50... If a factor is
>found for an exponent, it's eliminated from further testing
>of any kind.
Isn't the factor itself verified?
___
Stefan Struiker wrote:
>When a requested factoring assignment is listed with, say, 52 in
>an account log, does this mean it has been factored to 52 bits,
>but _without_ success? Or could a factor have already been
>found in some cases, but less than 52 bits long?
If it's listed as 52 in the fa
TeamG:
When a requested factoring assignment is listed with, say, 52 in an account log,
does this mean it has been factored to 52 bits, but _without_ success?
Or could a factor have already been found in some cases, but less than
52 bits long?
My strategy in factoring 13.3 mill exponents and u
>
>Here is a calculation I did about six months ago
>
>AMD K6/2 500 MHz (plus fan)45 pounds Sterling
>Super-socket-7 motherboard 45 pounds
>32M 100Mhz RAM 20 pounds
>Old 486 to put it in1 pound
>
>To this one should add the cost of electricity.
On Sat, 17 Jun 2000, Lem Novantotto wrote:
> On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 05:37:06 -0400, in Mersenne_mailing_list you
> wrote:
> >Is all your hard work(and subsequent credit) lost? No, although the server
> >has already re-assigned them to another account it will still accept the
> >results and properly
Steinar H. Gunderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes
>>2. Which type of processor, memory etc will give the most bang for the buck?
>> We rarely see anything beyond P2-250's, so I would have to pay retail for
>>that.
>
Here is a calculation I did about six months ago
AMD K6/2 500 MHz (plus fan)
On Sat, 17 Jun 2000 05:37:06 -0400, in Mersenne_mailing_list you
wrote:
>Is all your hard work(and subsequent credit) lost? No, although the server
>has already re-assigned them to another account it will still accept the
>results and properly credit your account for the completed work.
Hi!
I
Hi ALL:
This is a letter I sent asking what happened to the prime numbers I was
working on. I am posting it here to remind people who are doing 10million digit
numbers to log on at least once a month to update there page so this doesn't happen to
them
Hi Lawrence,
I reviewed the serv
20 matches
Mail list logo
