20100606, 18:03  #1 
Mar 2010
43 Posts 
Sieve Benchmark Thread
Let's get the ball rolling on this one.
Processor: Pentium 4 3.4 GHz tpsieve for the variable nrange: 5M p/sec tpsieve for a single n: 71.5M p/sec NewPGen for a single n: 86M p/sec NewPGen for "Operation Megabit Twin": estimated to be 80 hours for 1T 
20100606, 18:46  #2 
Mar 2005
Internet; Ukraine, Kiev
407_{10} Posts 
CPU: Intel i5750 (all 4 cores loaded).
tpsieve on x86_64 Linux for n=480000485000: 108M p/sec. 
20100606, 21:00  #3 
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT5)
6249_{10} Posts 

20100607, 00:07  #4 
Mar 2010
101011_{2} Posts 
From what I've seen, the Megabit Twin project goes through a range of k, not a range of p. So that's ~3.5M k/sec, not 3.5M p/sec.

20100607, 00:25  #5 
A Sunny Moo
Aug 2007
USA (GMT5)
6249_{10} Posts 
Ah, right, I see now...most of the prime search efforts I've worked with deal with relatively small ranges of k, and thus I am used to always having an unqualified reference to the suffix "T" refer to p, not k. Since in this project both values are of magnitudes that can be reasonably referred to in T, I would suggest that in the future qualifiers be used: for example "k=1T" instead of just 1T, leaving the latter (or even better, p=1T) strictly for p references.
Last fiddled with by mdettweiler on 20100607 at 00:26 
20100607, 11:49  #6 
"Dave"
Sep 2005
UK
2^{3}·347 Posts 
You can also calculate a rate in p/sec. We are currently sieving to p=100e9 and therefore 80 hours translates to 347k p/sec. Not very fast, but NewPGen has to break a 1T k range into almost 250 pieces until it gets to p=1e9.

20100607, 17:01  #7  
Just call me Henry
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)
2^{3}×739 Posts 
Quote:
I will do a test now to see vaguely when. edit: ~p=4e4 would do the trick nicely Last fiddled with by henryzz on 20100607 at 17:05 

20100607, 18:03  #8  
I quite division it
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England
31·67 Posts 
Quote:
I was about to do some tests. So, you are suggesting sieving to just 40,000 then again to 100G and it will fit into 485Mb? Just making sure I've got it right. 

20100607, 18:16  #9 
May 2010
499 Posts 
The default option for NewPGen is to sieve to 1G, then to 100G. I don't know whether it's possible to change it to what you were suggesting.

20100607, 18:35  #10 
I quite division it
"Chris"
Feb 2005
England
4035_{8} Posts 
I meant run it once to 40,000 then manually load it again to 100G.

20100607, 19:20  #11 
Just call me Henry
"David"
Sep 2007
Cambridge (GMT/BST)
2^{3}·739 Posts 
That should work. Once each bit is sieved upto the limit set(in OptionsSieve Until in windows) they will be comibined into one file which should be in theory small enougth to fit into 485Mb. I haven't tested this although I have done something like this to combine early(not really early like this) before so I know that bit works. It's the 485Mb bit that I am not so certain over. It depends whether the memory usage is just number of candidates or if it is also effected by distance between candidates etc.

Thread Tools  
Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Perpetual benchmark thread...  Xyzzy  Hardware  851  20210824 05:08 
Hardware Benchmark Jest Thread for 100M exponents  joblack  Hardware  284  20201229 03:54 
LLR benchmark thread  Oddball  Riesel Prime Search  5  20100802 00:11 
sr5sieve Benchmark thread  axn  Sierpinski/Riesel Base 5  25  20100528 23:57 
New Sieve Thread Discussion  Citrix  Prime Sierpinski Project  15  20050829 13:56 