Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Hyper Threading and Chess

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 08:49:31 12/31/02

Go up one level in this thread


On December 30, 2002 at 22:32:52, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On December 30, 2002 at 20:29:11, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>
>>On December 30, 2002 at 19:39:23, Frank Koenig wrote:
>>
>>>Two questions.
>>>
>>>One) Will Intel's HT technology be able to help chess programs above and beyond
>>>just allowing one CPU to appear as two?
>>>
>>>Second) If you are running XP, will HT require XP Pro instead of XP Home to take
>>>advantage of it?
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>
>>>Frank
>>
>>For dual machines you need even newer releases of OSes to still get
>>released.
>>
>>However you can profit from it in a very limited way. It's a speedup of
>>18% for DIEP at the latest P4 (3.06Ghz), at older P4s the profit is less
>>(like P4 Xeon 2.8Ghz) and even older P4s the profit is zero or negative.
>
>Any chance you will _ever_ "test before talking"?
>
>The 2.8 xeon has the _same_ SMT core as the PIV/3.06.  The _same_ means
>"the same", not "something that is not as good as."

http://www.realworldtech.com/index.cfm  and ask intel designers themselves.

>That is simply a crock statement that is nonsense.  From _testing_ on
>my part...

I see a clear difference in performance. Intel managed to slowly improve SMT
to what it is now. I do not find 18% impressive knowing the chip is already
that much slower than the K7 for me.

>
>>
>>So it's progressing but the P4 is a processor not really mature enough:
>>too little trace cache and too little datacache: just 1024 quadwords;
>
>
>So?  12K micro-ops.  8kb data.  Core-speed L2 cache with 512KB unified
>cache.  Seems to work quite well in all the testing I have done.

If it is in theory simply 2 processors then 11% at older types and 18% at
new P4 3.06ghz is not much and because of the small L1. Also i didn't
figure out yet how big the branch prediction table (BTB) is in the P4
but it probably isn't so impressive.

>
>
>>compare with the 64KB L1 data cache of a K7 which is i guess 16384
>>doublewords.
>
>
>what is with all the quadword/doubleword nonsense?

>I think _most_ here can figure out what 64 KB turns into in your favorite
>data size...

64KB of K7 and just 1024 words of P4.

The P4 is using 64 bits adressing for the L1 that means just 1024 words.
I prefer personally 16384 words of 32 bits.

However the P4 doesn't deliver 2048 words of 32 bits. It delivers 1024
words of 64 bits.

>
>
>
>>
>>It's already having a very small L1 cache and trace cache compared to
>>the L1 of the K7 (128KB) and now you have to divide that by 2 again.
>>
>>So that isn't very positive yet.
>>
>>Let's wait for the future if we can see bigger profits. In which case it
>>gets very interesting of course.



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.