Test Number 4 Prefix only (625 ranges x 40 bit in size, searching for 40+ bit prefix matches; all in puzzle 71's range and its address): I forgot I had the program running so it ran 625 ranges (each range was 40 bit in size like the other tests) via prefix method. Total prefixes found = 401 (all 40+ bit) Total time = 1,114.30 minutes with an average scanned range time of 106 seconds. The average time for checking an entire 40 bit range is 167 seconds. If all ranges were checked 100%, that would come out to around 1,739 minutes. So during this prefix method run, an average of 61 seconds was saved by jumping to next range once a prefix was found. That's an overall time savings of roughly 625 minutes. So as obvious, the prefix method will get through x amount of ranges quicker, but it will also obviously skip a lot of other prefixes, and COULD skip the actual target address. In previous runs, the prefix method found between 62-67% of all prefixes. If we use a 65% rate, that would mean if we ran the 625 ranges and checked every key, we would likely find 620 prefixes. The overall time is also roughly 65%. To summarize: Prefix method 1,114.30 minutes and 401 prefixes found 100% method 1,739 minutes and roughly 620 prefixes found The more ranges ran, the more time will be saved via the prefix method, but also, the more prefixes will be skipped. So you will gain 35% speed up but at the cost of 35% less found prefixes.
Test Number 4 Prefix only (625 ranges x 40 bit in size, searching for 40+ bit prefix matches; all in puzzle 71's range and its address): I forgot I had the program running so it ran 625 ranges (each range was 40 bit in size like the other tests) via prefix method. Total prefixes found = 401 (all 40+ bit) Total time = 1,114.30 minutes with an average scanned range time of 106 seconds. The average time for checking an entire 40 bit range is 167 seconds. If all ranges were checked 100%, that would come out to around 1,739 minutes. So during this prefix method run, an average of 61 seconds was saved by jumping to next range once a prefix was found. That's an overall time savings of roughly 625 minutes. So as obvious, the prefix method will get through x amount of ranges quicker, but it will also obviously skip a lot of other prefixes, and COULD skip the actual target address. In previous runs, the prefix method found between 62-67% of all prefixes. If we use a 65% rate, that would mean if we ran the 625 ranges and checked every key, we would likely find 620 prefixes. The overall time is also roughly 65%. To summarize: Prefix method 1,114.30 minutes and 401 prefixes found 100% method 1,739 minutes and roughly 620 prefixes found The more ranges ran, the more time will be saved via the prefix method, but also, the more prefixes will be skipped. So you will gain 35% speed up but at the cost of 35% less found prefixes.

Test Number 4 Prefix only (625 ranges x 40 bit in size, searching for 40+ bit prefix matches; all in puzzle 71's range and its address): I forgot I had the program running so it ran 625 ranges (each range was 40 bit in size like the other tests) via prefix method. Total prefixes found = 401 (all 40+ bit) Total time = 1,114.30 minutes with an average scanned range time of 106 seconds. The average time for checking an entire 40 bit range is 167 seconds. If all ranges were checked 100%, that would come out to around 1,739 minutes. So during this prefix method run, an average of 61 seconds was saved by jumping to next range once a prefix was found. That's an overall time savings of roughly 625 minutes. So as obvious, the prefix method will get through x amount of ranges quicker, but it will also obviously skip a lot of other prefixes, and COULD skip the actual target address. In previous runs, the prefix method found between 62-67% of all prefixes. If we use a 65% rate, that would mean if we ran the 625 ranges and checked every key, we would likely find 620 prefixes. The overall time is also roughly 65%. To summarize: Prefix method 1,114.30 minutes and 401 prefixes found 100% method 1,739 minutes and roughly 620 prefixes found The more ranges ran, the more time will be saved via the prefix method, but also, the more prefixes will be skipped. So you will gain 35% speed up but at the cost of 35% less found prefixes.

Test Number 4 Prefix only (625 ranges x 40 bit in size, searching for 40+ bit prefix matches; all in puzzle 71's range and its address): I forgot I had the program running so it ran 625 ranges (each range was 40 bit in size like the other tests) via prefix method. Total prefixes found = 401 (all 40+ bit) Total time = 1,114.30 minutes with an average scanned range time of 106 seconds. The average time for checking an entire 40 bit range is 167 seconds. If all ranges were checked 100%, that would come out to around 1,739 minutes. So during this prefix method run, an average of 61 seconds was saved by jumping to next range once a prefix was found. That's an overall time savings of roughly 625 minutes. So as obvious, the prefix method will get through x amount of ranges quicker, but it will also obviously skip a lot of other prefixes, and COULD skip the actual target address. In previous runs, the prefix method found between 62-67% of all prefixes. If we use a 65% rate, that would mean if we ran the 625 ranges and checked every key, we would likely find 620 prefixes. The overall time is also roughly 65%. To summarize: Prefix method 1,114.30 minutes and 401 prefixes found 100% method 1,739 minutes and roughly 620 prefixes found The more ranges ran, the more time will be saved via the prefix method, but also, the more prefixes will be skipped. So you will gain 35% speed up but at the cost of 35% less found prefixes.