Author: Brian Richardson
Date: 09:47:24 02/17/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 17, 2003 at 11:22:55, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On February 16, 2003 at 21:56:03, Brian Richardson wrote: > >>On February 16, 2003 at 19:08:03, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On February 16, 2003 at 16:50:48, Brian Richardson wrote: >>> >>>>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% >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>That looks horrible. What compiler, etc? IE the best results I have seen >>>come from the microsoft in-house compiler guys. Even a 1ghz processor should >>>be faster than that using a raw PIII at 1ghz... >> >>That is the point. Most of use do not have access to Microsoft and Intel >>compiler experts. I used the free IA-64 compiler updates from Intel and >>Microsoft at: >>http://www.intel.com/software/products/compilers/downloads/cwin.htm >>http://www.microsoft.com/msdownload/platformsdk/sdkupdate/ >> > >Can't offer much advice since I don't have one, but it is pretty strange that >the >1ghz Mckinley is less than 1/2 the speed of a 600mhz 21264 alpha, which does >suggest something is badly wrong... No, the 1GHz Itanium2 is about the same speed as a 1GHz Alpha, per published SPEC results. Again, the point is that much faster results may be possible with hand optimizations, which Tim likely did, I assume. Here are the Crafty SPEC results: Alpha 21264A 616MHz 219 Alpha 21264C 1GHz 123 Alpha 21264C 1.25GHz 98.5 > > > >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>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 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.