Can I put a suggestion to the group..
I feel it is ridiculous that George has to beg/borrow the latest
architecture in order to optimise Prime95. I also know from being a member
of the prime search community for the last three years the amount of hard
work George puts into the project.
The
I feel it is ridiculous that George has to beg/borrow the latest
architecture in order to optimise Prime95. I also know from being a member
of the prime search community for the last three years the amount of hard
work George puts into the project.
agreed. how come AMD isn't burying George
On Fri, 22 Jun 2001, John R Pierce wrote:
I feel it is ridiculous that George has to beg/borrow the latest
architecture in order to optimise Prime95. I also know from being a member
of the prime search community for the last three years the amount of hard
work George puts into the project.
For some reason, I am at a loss to explain, a v21 P4 1.4 GHz factors
significantely slower that a P3 v20 700MHz. Is there a reason, and solution,
for this?
Bradford J.
Brown
-
This message was sent using GSWeb Mail Services.
On 22 Jun 2001, at 13:12, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For some reason, I am at a loss to explain, a v21 P4 1.4 GHz factors
significantely slower that a P3 v20 700MHz. Is there a reason, and
solution, for this?
Good question.
AFAIK George has done nothing to the factoring code. You will see a
- Original Message -
From: Milton Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Milton Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, June 22, 2001 7:36 AM
Subject: [PrimeNumbers] AMD vs. Intel Floating Point
The prime number group, might be interested in
these timings.
Milton L. Brown
Lawrence Cairns-Smith wrote:
I therefore suggest that a pay pal account (or similar) is set up. People
who wished could easily donate a few dollars to make sure that George has
available to him the latest architecture. I mean, come on, it wouldn't take
Sounds good to me.
While we're
Hey Gordon,
At 01:42 PM 6/22/2001 -0800, Gordon Bower wrote:
After seeing a post on this list a few weeks ago I decided to branch out
and try a few ranges from Michael Hartley's page looking for k*2^n-1
primes.
Anyway, a few curious observations I made, which surprised me:
I have 2 computers, a
BTW there was an unreasonable acceleration of trial factoring
between the P5 architecture (Pentium Classic/MMX) and the P6
architecture (Pentium Pro / PII / PIII / Celeron / Xeon), so you
can't simply assume that Intel doesn't care about integer
performance!
But they clearly don't care
Hi,
At 11:45 PM 6/22/2001 +0100, Michael Bell wrote:
But they clearly don't care about it on the P4:
Command Ticks on P2/P3Ticks on P4
MOV 1 1
ADD/SUB 1 1
ADC/SBB 2 8
MUL 4 14-18
SHR/SHL
Hi all,
At 09:15 PM 6/22/2001 +, Russel Brooks wrote:
I therefore suggest that a pay pal account (or similar) is set up. People
who wished could easily donate a few dollars to make sure that George has
available to him the latest architecture. I mean, come on, it wouldn't take
Sounds
Windows NT and Win2000 users should consider changing prime95's priority
to two. There have been reports that idle priority doesn't work as
documented
in the Microsoft documentation.
I'd be curious about that... I haven't heard anything, but then I haven't
looked either. :)
As I've said
Bradford J. Brown wrote:
For some reason, I am at a loss to explain, a v21 P4 1.4 GHz
factors significantely slower that a P3 v20 700MHz. Is there a
reason, and solution, for this?
Hmmm... Good question...
AFAIK, the only change George has or is going to make in the
factoring code since
Mersenne Digest Friday, June 22 2001 Volume 01 : Number 863
--
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2001 08:06:28 +0200
From: george de fockert [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Mersenne: Prime95 - V21.1.1 aka v21a
- -
14 matches
Mail list logo
