Author: Charles Worthington
Date: 08:18:43 04/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
To me, at this point, the jury is still out on 4 threads vs. two. I could run the machine on 2 threads on the server and see what results I get but those results would be meaningless because I have no way of knowing if the machine would have played any better or worse using all 4 threads in identical positions against identical opponents. The deepfritzmark test clearly shows an increase in the performance of Deep Fritz 7 on dual threads vs four_but_ a significant slowdown in nodes per second. This seems contradictory and had I gotten the same result from Shredder I would have been suspicious as to the accuracy of that particular benchmark test....but I didn't. Shredder showed a significant benefit in both nps and time-to-solution with hyperthreading enabled. But the fritz result is baffling: On the surface a 10% speedup in nodes per second should result in a 10% increase in the number of positions reviewed by the program. It should also result in greater ply depth. The faster the machine searches, the faster it should be able to solve the fritzmark position. This seems like common sense to me. So, my question is this: Is the fritz benchmark somehow more innacurate than shredder's or is the reasoning I am using here somehow flawed? Charles
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.