Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 11:38:01 02/28/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 28, 2002 at 14:22:18, Eugene Nalimov wrote: >Sorry, I don't understand. We are not talking about "performance per MHz". We >are talking about *absolute* performance. And here Alpha is 3% better athan >contemporary P4 Xeon. True enough. Certainly Intel does have better fabs and better technology than those who manufacture Alpha chips. Now that they have the Alpha technology, they could build one at .1 micron if they so desired. >Or probably we should talk about price/performance? :-) A 2 GHz Xeon system will also be "too expensive." It's amazing what they can charge you for a teaspoon of sand. >Eugene > >On February 28, 2002 at 13:42:34, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On February 27, 2002 at 21:55:19, Eugene Nalimov wrote: >> >>>Alpha is not "2X as fast as anything around". >>> >>>Fastest submitted SpecInt2k result for Alpha is 621(base)/679(peak). AlphaServer >>>ES45 Model 68/1000, hardware available October 2001. >>> >>>Dell Precision WorkStation 530 (2.0GHz P4 Xeon) has SpecInt2k >>>642(base)/663(peak), hardware available September 2001. >>> >>>679 is greater than 663, but not 2x. Not even 1.1x. >> >>Interesting. At twice the clock speed, the Xeon was almost as fast! >> >>Thanks for proving my point.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.