Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:52:03 04/08/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 08, 2002 at 06:57:56, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On April 07, 2002 at 12:09:12, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On April 07, 2002 at 01:00:55, Russell Reagan wrote: >> >>>Last night I was cruising the CCC archives reading over discussions on various >>>data representation approaches in chess programs, and I came across this >>>statement from 1999 in this post: >>>http://www.it.ro/ccc_search/ccc.php?art_id=39708 >>> >>>"Just wait 5 years and see if you can find a 32 bit machine left." >>> >>>Well we are 2 years away from the 5 year deadline. Do you still agree with this? >> >>Yes. The end is "in sight". >> >> >> >> >>>I'm not trying to throw old quotes back at you or anything. I'm really more >>>curious about how much longer it will be until 64-bit machines are the norm. >>> >>>I'm also curious if when the time comes that 64-bit machines are the norm, if >>>they will be on par with the Hz speeds of the 32-bit machines. For example, >>>right now you can get a 2.1 GHZ Athlon or 2.4 GHz P4 without having to take out >>>a loan. If you want a 64-bit Itanium, you're looking at $2,500 - $7,000 for a >>>chip that runs at 733-800 MHz (www.pricewatch.com). So once 64-bit machines are >>>practical from a price standpoint, will they still be at a third of the speed we >>>can get from a 32-bit machine? >> >>64 bit machines can run at identical clock speeds. The issue is price. As >>demand increases, price will go down driving performance up. >> >> >> >>> >>>If my data from pricewatch isn't entirely accurate please correct me. E.g. if >>>there are other 64-bit chips that are cheaper and faster than Itanium. Heck, how >>>much would a good 64-bit system cost today? >>> >>>Thanks, >>>Russell >> >> >>There are plenty of chips cheaper than Itanium and far faster... but Intel >>is going to set the standard. The other vendors (HP, DEC/COMPAQ/whatever they >>are today, MIPS, IBM, have been doing 64 bit chips for years. Intel is _way_ >>behind... > >I am not so sure about this. Did you already try mckinley? >6 integer units or something? > >that'll kick butt of course. No I haven't... However I have tried the production Itanium machines and they were pretty bad... The Alpha was the best around by a huge margin...
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.