GURU Whats Going On??

Reply #42

lottoshlep — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 19:00:06 GMT

Oh yes, the 'old' Commodore ..

Reply #41

four4me — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 18:43:00 GMT

commodore 56k was my first machine i loved it q basic.In the machine shop we used punch code for cnc thousands of holes on a one inch wide peice of paper on a tape reel to fabricate parts wow.

Reply #40

lottoshlep — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 18:38:56 GMT

Quote: O

Reply #39

lottoshlep — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 18:38:00 GMT

Quote: O

Reply #38

vick — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 18:10:51 GMT

Reply #37

johnph77 — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 17:11:32 GMT

Do not bend, fold, spindle or mutilate.....gl

Reply #36

lottoshlep — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 15:34:59 GMT

Hey Vick, picture this: a s

Reply #35

vick — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 15:06:07 GMT

i remember back in the late

Reply #34

johnph77 — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 08:33:25 GMT

Agreed on the programmer-lazy memory-laden theory. My first PC was an Apple II (circa 1979) with 64K RAM, no hard drive (2-130KB 5-1/4 floppy drives) and a 9 monochrome monitor, limited to displaying 25 rows by 40 columns on the display. I thought I was in heaven when I bought a card where I could look at 80 columns. Also, the upgrade from 48K RAM to 64K RAM priced out at $250. ScreenWriter and VisiCalc - ahhhhh, the memories.....lol.I still have QBasic (and BASICA) on my current computer - th... [ More ]

Reply #33

BobP — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 05:39:33 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by four4me on March 16, 2004plnwebguy wrote: And if you have a dual processors, then things are working that much faster. plnwebguy, It's as if you were reading my mind. Your answer to my earlier question was where I was heading next. I intend to put dual disks drives in a unit with the latest mother board I also inquired at a local shop about dual processors. Unless they release the super 25 gig processor (supposedly able to handle a trillion bits in a nano second) I g... [ More ]

Reply #32

plnwebguy — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 05:04:23 GMT

four4me - no problem, glad to help out. I do tech stuff for a living so glad to help out if possible. One thing I've learned is to buy something that can be upgraded - either the processors can be replaced or more added, more RAM can be added, etc. Software is important too - the 64 bit chips are blazing fast like vick pointed out, but unfortunately almost all of the software out there now is 32 bit or 16 bit based. Intel's always said they don't push the chip in the consumer market because... [ More ]

Reply #31

vick — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 04:19:54 GMT

four look into the new intel p4 extreme HT edition with 2 mb cache = they scream and from what i've read beat Amd's new 64 chip

Reply #30

four4me — Wed, 17 Mar 2004 00:21:43 GMT

plnwebguy wrote: And if you have a dual processors, then things are working that much faster. plnwebguy, It's as if you were reading my mind. Your answer to my earlier question was where I was heading next. I intend to put dual disks drives in a unit with the latest mother board I also inquired at a local shop about dual processors. Unless they release the super 25 gig processor (supposedly able to handle a trillion bits in a nano second) I guess were all stuck with what's available. The next u... [ More ]

Reply #29

plnwebguy — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 22:51:27 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by four4me on March 16, 2004Thanks again Apagogeas for your reply to my interest in all this. Now I will ask a couple more stupid questions. The latest processors out there 4.3 gigs and the newest Athelon technology. Are these processors going to reduce the run time of the lottery software programs? Or are their other processors that are more powerful. If the PC has 512 meg of cache memory or 1.2 gig of C memory would that make a difference. See I am in the market for a... [ More ]

Reply #28

paul762 — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 21:46:56 GMT

guru, whic bits would i need to make lottosync run faster? is it more memory or more hard drive etc? also have you seen the work on quantum computers that are predicting randomness

Reply #27

lottoarchitect — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 21:22:50 GMT

Guru,My intention is not to lower the quality of your program, I never did that and I'll never do. I never tested your program to have any opinion on this. I just have a feeling you are somehow angry with me and I don't know why. I may be wrong of course.Besides that, whatever you have done, no matter how complex is it, it is still an algorithm/code. Otherwise, you bypass the turing-machine theory! As I said to you 1-2 months ago, I have nothing against programs that require a lot of time. It... [ More ]

Reply #26

Guru — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 20:52:26 GMT

Apagogeas:I used to work on an old amiga 500 too, so we share a common background. I believe everything you say is true. Increased cpu speed has made programmers lazy. They are waisting memory and power more than ever before just because it is available plenty.Lottosynchronizer is made with care to ram usage and speed. What you just said goes for poorly written algorithms indeed. But LS does not use algorithms for it's predictions. It is based on something completely different, and the computa... [ More ]

Reply #25

lottoarchitect — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 19:44:30 GMT

Let's be realistic. If we n

Reply #24

four4me — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 18:17:28 GMT

Thanks again Apagogeas for your reply to my interest in all this. Now I will ask a couple more stupid questions. The latest processors out there 4.3 gigs and the newest Athelon technology. Are these processors going to reduce the run time of the lottery software programs? Or are their other processors that are more powerful. If the PC has 512 meg of cache memory or 1.2 gig of C memory would that make a difference. See I am in the market for a new PC and I would like to purchase a PC that's goin... [ More ]

Reply #23

lottoarchitect — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 14:44:42 GMT

I'll explain it in more technical terms. The memory on graphcs cards is to cache textures and only that. You cannot load any code there, neither execute it or manipulate any data in the sense of integers, arrays etc. It is just a good mechanism to quickly transfer textures to the GPU (the processor in the graphics card) instead of tranferring them directly from the main memory which is rather slow for this task. On the other hand, GPU contains instructions specifically designed to manipulate the... [ More ]

Reply #22

four4me — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 14:23:23 GMT

Thanks Apagogeas I realize that the lottery software programs crunch numbers and that processing speed was/is important. I just wondered if lottery software programs designed differently if it could utilize the power and speed and performance of an accelerator card which many of the high end grahics/gaming cards utilize and some even have on board cache I think. I don't know all about the newest stuff thats out there on the market now. But 22 hrs to run a program seems like a long time for resul... [ More ]

Reply #21

lottoarchitect — Tue, 16 Mar 2004 13:26:26 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by four4me on March 15, 2004wouldn't you be able to run the program faster with more cache memory or a fast graphics card like voodoo's accelerator graphics card, 256MB ATI Radeon 9600 Pro card, or geForce2 mx400 card....Or be able to upgrade their system to preform with better speed/performance.No, you don't get any speed benefits if you install better graphics cards, unless the program is designed to display 3D graphics which it can display faster. Computation in lotte... [ More ]

Reply #20

lottosyncman — Mon, 15 Mar 2004 12:37:02 GMT

got 3/10 on saturdays lotto 6/49 gave me 3/6 five times

Reply #19

vick — Mon, 15 Mar 2004 06:44:19 GMT

i'm finding i get better results using it with KenoI can't wait for the Keno version to come out

Reply #18

four4me — Mon, 15 Mar 2004 04:57:02 GMT

wouldn't you be able to run the program faster with more cache memory or a fast graphics card like voodoo's accelerator graphics card, 256MB ATI Radeon 9600 Pro card, or geForce2 mx400 card. Or are lottery software programs dependent on processing speed alone. Seems to me that running a lottery software program would be the same as running any game where speed is more a factor than strategy. Like running a race with the accelerator stuck to the floor with some of those cards it should make your... [ More ]

Reply #17

Irvin — Mon, 15 Mar 2004 04:55:05 GMT

Havent downloaded my updated copy yet but when I send my details I'll let you know how it performs against a set of 40 balls.

Reply #16

BobP — Mon, 15 Mar 2004 03:29:52 GMT

I suspect the time frame is at least in part dependent on the game size and numbers you enter for the previous three draws. Better to start the prediction run early then late hoping for a fast run. Anyone seeing winning numbers among the ten? BobP

Reply #15

lottoshlep — Sun, 14 Mar 2004 15:29:32 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by paul762 on March 14, 2004>>> its 26 hours for 30000 samples!! <<<Well, you're getting about 3 sec per sample which is about what you'd expect for a 1.3 GHz machine. I don't think you can improve on that much without getting a faster unit, but it's a lot better than originally thought,Cheers

Reply #14

reddog — Sun, 14 Mar 2004 11:19:09 GMT

Paul, 26 hours is not bad at all with what you have. I ran a 12000 sample on my EMachine and it took 32 hours. I think I had something running in the background. I need to figure it out.

Reply #13

paul762 — Sun, 14 Mar 2004 07:26:23 GMT

please pardon my mista

Reply #12

emilyg — Sun, 14 Mar 2004 03:19:05 GMT

lottoshlep - neat site. thanks.

Reply #11

lottoshlep — Sun, 14 Mar 2004 02:40:34 GMT

Quote: Originally posted by paul762 on March 13, 2004>>> i dont know much about computers so as far as cleaning up apps. , ive got no chance <<<<Have a look at this site: http://forums.techguy.org/ . Try a few searches on how to optimize performance, etc. or ask questions there. Those guys are good.

Reply #10

RJOh — Sat, 13 Mar 2004 23:04:43 GMT

shoedog20The name of the program is Lottosynchronizer and you can find out all you want to know at Guru's homepage, for that check the post by Guru. RJOh

Reply #9

shoedog20 — Sat, 13 Mar 2004 23:00:06 GMT

whats the name of this prog

Reply #8

lottosyncman — Sat, 13 Mar 2004 22:50:01 GMT

heck i realize the frustration you have running the program at a really effective speed i have the same problem but if it takes 2 days to complete so what just start the prediction process right after the draw tonight and it should be completed by late tues night ready to get in on wed draw

Reply #7

EXCALIBUR — Sat, 13 Mar 2004 22:14:32 GMT

PaulHow are you?Having Pc problems?Don't worry too much about them.I am sure that you are doing O.KBut it might not hurt if you do buy a book about computingand Windows 98, Me, 2000, Xp or what-ever system you have and catch-up a little on those things, it's always nice to know what's happening.And yes Guru is doing his best helping any and everybody, as a matter of fact, he is doing very well, but there is only so much that he can do for anybody, you know?Anyhow, have a nice day and don't worry... [ More ]

Reply #6

paul762 — Sat, 13 Mar 2004 20:23:41 GMT

hey pal im lucky im surfing the web i dont know much about computers so as far as cleaning up apps. , ive got no chance. thanks though. when i said missing out , i meant because of my pc not the software. by the way what do you mean smart-assed remarks

Reply #5

lottoshlep — Sat, 13 Mar 2004 18:23:48 GMT

Sounds to me like you want someone to hold your hand on this. C'mon man surely you can figure some things out by yourself. Your unit should be fast enough to knock off 20K samples in 20 hrs or less, if it takes 26 hrs for 12K then the CPU must be running other apps at the same time, clean it up and try again with only L-Synch running. As far as 'missing out' goes that is a non-issue because you're the only one responsible for that and blaming others will not get you far.You can go ahead with som... [ More ]

Reply #4

paul762 — Sat, 13 Mar 2004 17:34:09 GMT

yes he has replied to most of mine aswell but not all, and you are mistaken guru, i sent you email on the 10/3/04 regarding this matter and it wasnt on a weekend.because of the waiting with v1.7 i am stuck with having to play v1.6 because i play daily play, i feel i will be missing out because my pc is not fast enough, 26 hours for 12000 samples,1.3ghz 256mb 40gb what about your test results for 30000 samples

Reply #3

lottoshlep — Sat, 13 Mar 2004 16:47:39 GMT

To his credit Marco has alw

Reply #2

spock — Sat, 13 Mar 2004 16:22:26 GMT

Come on give the guy a beak. I think Guru does his best i had a problem downloading LS1.6 and he went out of his way to help( email after email.)So i say thanks for your efforts.

Reply #1

Guru — Sat, 13 Mar 2004 15:35:46 GMT

Paul:I've received zero emails with this question from you.And yes you already posed this question on this forum, and I didn't yet answer it. But it's also weekend for me you know. How many companies give after sales support in the weekend ????How can you not be happy with my support. I've already answered 1001 questions from you !!!Here is the answer to your question : at 12000 samples it may outperform v1.6, but it may also not.You should realize that sometimes there just is no clear answer to... [ More ]

GURU Whats Going On??

paul762 — Sat, 13 Mar 2004 09:19:14 GMT

Ive Sent Numerous Emails An