Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 15:20:20 12/02/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 02, 2002 at 16:26:21, Aaron Gordon wrote: >On December 02, 2002 at 16:17:25, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On December 02, 2002 at 15:35:25, Aaron Gordon wrote: >> >>> >>>Take a look at this: >>>http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/DownloadableAssets/MPF_Hammer_Presentation.PDF >>>> >> >>What am I looking for? I'm talking _today_ not next year... for example... > >Not looking for anything, just looking at. Doesn't hurt to learn about new >stuff. Being a teacher it would seem you'd be more apt to want to learn. Maybe >I'm crazy ;) I always look at next generation hardware. But when talking performance, I always use what is available, as opposed to what will be available if I wait long enough. All I have to do is wait and one day chess will be completely solved, for example. If I live long enough and the sun lasts long enough, etc.. > >>>>I hope they can deliver a quad opteron for a resonable price. They were talking >>>>about quad >>>>K7's two years ago and not a single instance has shown up yet. Intel talked >>>>about the 8-way >>>>boxes a while back and delivered a kludge there, using a "fusion" chipset to tie >>>>two 4-way >>>>clusters of processors together into a single 8-way box, but with terrible >>>>memory performance. >>>>They tried to offset that by only offering 2M L2 caches, but that drove the >>>>price up and didn't >>>>help memory-bound large applications at all... I hope the quad opterons don't >>>>end up in >>>>never-never land as the 8-way boxes did.. >>> >>>Here's a picture of a Quad opteron system if for some reason you think it's >>>never going to happen... >>>http://www.amdzone.com/articleimages/cpu/hammer/4popt.JPG >>>There are many Dual Opterons out as well.. >> >>They had "pictures" of quad K7 MBs as well. Never saw one on the street, >>however. >>Again, I don't see how to evaluate what's gonna be. Just what is that we can >>get our hands >>on... > >About all I can say is, "You'll see" :) Remember this comment. That's fine and I don't mind looking at future stuff. But to compare, it is necessary to compare what _is_ rather than what _will be_. Because the latter can never be compared accurately while the former can be compared every time... > >>>>If I recall, the 4=way dual 2.0ghz xeon is the fastest PC-class machine around >>>>right now, >>>>by a wide margin. And the heavier the load placed on it, the wider that gap >>>>becomes...
This page took 0.01 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.