Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 16:22:56 12/02/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 02, 2002 at 18:41:38, Aaron Gordon wrote: >On December 02, 2002 at 18:20:20, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>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... > >So compare Slates dual 2100+ (1.73Ghz) getting a 1.68x speedup with Crafty >v18.11 and 1.69 million nodes/sec to your other P4 systems. :) the 2400+MP chips >are already out, too.. Dual 2400+ should pull right under 2 million nps. >If for some reason you'd like the "1.7x dual amd" binary, grab it at: >ftp://speedycpu.dyndns.org/pub/crafty/c1811smp-k7sse.zip I'm more interested in current hardware. IE two 2.8ghz xeons with the E7500 chipset vs the AMD 2600+/2700+ since they "seem" to be available... I'll post the Intel numbers when the machine arrives, both with and without hyper-threading. But I believe that the hyper-threading stuff is what is going to make the 2xXeon significantly faster... Since it seems to help for Crafty and Eugene has not fixed all of the spin/loop problems. I don't know if he fixed the Lock() asm stuff, but there is another place that needs fixing to make it really work efficiently. > > >>>>>>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.