Author: Keith Evans
Date: 07:27:50 03/07/03
Go up one level in this thread
On March 06, 2003 at 16:59:34, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On March 06, 2003 at 16:36:15, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >Here is some additional profile data. This is a couple of weeks old, but it was >produced by >running the "bench" command so anyone should be able to reproduce these numbers >using >whatever compiler they want. I used gcc as the person that asked for this data >a couple of >weeks ago was also using gcc and I thought it easier to keep the same compiler >for both of >us. > > 5.27 46.72 5.56 24487027 0.00 0.00 HashProbe > 0.81 95.91 0.85 19234964 0.00 0.00 HashStore > >This is using the 6 benchmark positions which has a couple of endgame positions >that >makes hashing more important. Total = 6.08%. If you eliminate hashing totally, >the >program will go from 2.16M NPS to 2.16/.9392 which is a grand total of 2.3M >nodes >per second, a _far_ cry from that 3M you were talking about. > >_your_ hash overhead might be 33%, but mine is not. > >I have no idea where you get your numbers from, but it is _clear_ that you don't >get >'em from computers... > >For anyone wanting to produce the above numbers, compile crafty with -pg for CC >and CX >flags (in addition to other options as already used) and add -pg to the LD >options as well. >Compile it using the Makefile you just modified, then type "crafty" "bench" and >when it >finishes "end". Then type "gprof crafty" and you'll see the percent of the time >spent in each >distinctly named procedure... > >Simple. Easy. More accurate than guesswork and hand-waving. In case this matters... What Linux distribution are you running? Is there anything to watch out for when setting up a box to support HT besides BIOS settings? Regards, Keith
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.