Author: Brian Richardson
Date: 13:50:48 02/16/03
I have been running some informal Itanium2 tests with Tinker and Crafty (18.15). The results are not encouraging. I know Bob Hyatt has posted better numbers for Itanium2, but I can’t come even close. Then again, I am no professional compiler developer or performance engineer. Anyway, here is the data (Knps). Intel IA64 Itanium2 (1GHz) dual CPU system vs dual AMD 1900+ (1.6GHz) Crafty18.15 1 CPU 2 CPUs SMP Speedup IA64 368 715 1.94 AMD 615 1015 1.65 IA64 Slower 40% 30% x86 binary on IA64 170 337 1.98 IA64 Slower 72% 67% Tinker IA64 260 AMD 330 IA64 Slower 21% x86 on IA64 103 IA64 Slower 69% Note that the 2 CPU SMP efficiency for the Itanium2 system is significantly better than the dual AMD system, as has been reported before. Also, note that both the Intel and Microsoft Itanium2 compilers produced different results, depending on debug (no optimization) vs optimization modes. Also, I could not get Crafty to compile with the Intel compiler, and some Tinker routines broke the Intel optimizer. Moreover, the Intel compiler produced code about 5% or so faster than the Microsoft compiler for Tinker. I was not able to get profiling to work, nor did I try Vtune. The results are more or less in line with the SPEC CPU2000int results for Crafty (see www.spec.org), some of which are (run times in seconds): Hewlett-Packard Company hp server rx2600 (1000 MHz, Itanium 2) 186.crafty 128 Advanced Micro Devices Epox 8KHA+ Motherboard, AMD Athlon (TM) XP 1900+ (CPU MHz: 1600) 186.crafty 106 Intel Corporation Intel D850EMVR motherboard (3.06 GHz, Pentium 4 processor with HT Technology) 186.crafty 86 Advanced Micro Devices ASUS A7N8X (REV 1.02) Motherboard, AMD Athlon (TM) XP 2800+ (CPU MHz: 2250) 186.crafty 76.3
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.