Author: Eugene Nalimov
Date: 13:46:10 01/16/03
Go up one level in this thread
David, *fast* SCSI drive is noticeable faster than best IDE drive. Problem is not only 15k or 10k rpm vs. 7.2k rpm. Problem is also seek time. On best IDE drive I had seen it's something ~8-9ms. On *average* SCSI drive it's ~4-5ms. More, I have Itanium 2 system with one SCSI drive with 320Mb/sec SCSI disk drive, and one with "only" 160Mb/sec. And I regularly see the difference. Drive with 320Mb/sec is really faster when I am doing something with tens of gigabytes of data :-) Thanks, Eugene On January 16, 2003 at 15:12:06, David Rasmussen wrote: >On January 16, 2003 at 14:47:54, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On January 16, 2003 at 13:31:39, David Rasmussen wrote: >> >>>I do more or less the same thing as everybody else, when probing EGTB's, judging >>>from the open source programs I've inspected. But I get a severe drop in NPS >>>when the tables are probed heavily. Much more than other programs, from what I >>>can see on ICC. >>> >>>What could be the course of this? >> >>Fast disks. IE I am currently using 15K rpm, ultra-320 scsi drives, with six of >>these 36 gig screamers running in a raid-0 (striped) manner, which is _really_ >>fast. >> >>If you are using an EIDE disk, performance is going to die. Particularly if you >>are >>using 5400 rpm drives. >> > >First of all, I'm not using 5400 rpm drives. Secondly, current IDE disks are not >as bad as you think. Thirdly, all of the program I've compared with during games >on ICC, where running on IDE disks, I would think. > >> >>>I have the same order of number of probes as other programs as I can see on ICC. >>>So my limiting of probes is not the problem. I only probe in the first couple of >>>plys and if there have just been a change of material on the board. The harddisk >>>I use is very fast. It is a Western Digital 80GB 7200 RPM with 8MB cache. So >>>that shouldn't be the problem either. I use NTFS, not FAT, I don't know if that >>>makes a difference, or file systems in general. I haven't done any serious >>>testing of this on EXT2, EXT3, ReiserFS etc. But as far as I know, people are >>>able to do this on Windows, so I must be able to do it too. >> >>that 7200RPM drive is double the rotational latency of a 15K drive. The >>bandwidth >>is a small fraction of a hot ultra-320 SCSI drive. >> > >I know it's slower, but very few people are not using disks comparable to mine, >and they don't seem to have a problem. Disks such as yours are not strictly >necesary, I would think. Maybe I'm wrong. Also, I still think you are >underestimating the performance of current IDE drives. I don't believe that >fraction is very small. > >>You might try upping the egtb cache size significantly to avoid some I/O. >> > >To how much, would you say? I tried going from 8MB to 64MB just now, and it >didn't help at all. In fact, it was slower. > >/David
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.