Author: Aaron Gordon
Date: 09:57:10 04/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 10, 2003 at 11:54:46, Pavel Blokhine wrote: >On April 10, 2003 at 11:34:59, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On April 10, 2003 at 02:37:36, Aaron Gordon wrote: >> >>>On April 09, 2003 at 23:08:15, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On April 09, 2003 at 20:17:14, Aaron Gordon wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 09, 2003 at 18:01:50, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On April 09, 2003 at 15:36:58, Aaron Gordon wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On April 09, 2003 at 12:14:37, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On April 09, 2003 at 11:04:51, Aaron Gordon wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On April 09, 2003 at 09:24:01, Charles Worthington wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>On April 09, 2003 at 00:46:15, Charles Worthington wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>On April 09, 2003 at 00:34:10, Pavel Blokhine wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>On April 09, 2003 at 00:17:16, Charles Worthington wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>On April 08, 2003 at 23:53:06, Charles Worthington wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>On April 08, 2003 at 23:41:44, Pavel Blokhine wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>I am looking to buy a new computer. I will be using it for many things, but >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>mostly for computer video games and chess online. So what computer would be >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>best? TheMicro Express MicroFlex 27A Powered by AMD's 2.17-GHz Athlon XP 2700+ >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>processor and 512MB of DDR400 SDRAM, the MicroFlex 27A earned a blistering score >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>of 130 on PC WorldBench 4 tests, for $2254 or a Dell Dimension 8250• 3.06-GHz >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Pentium 4 processor• 200GB hard drive• 18-inch LCD monitor• 128MB ATI Radeon >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>9700 Pro graphics• 16X DVD-ROM drive, DVD+RW/+R drive at $3158? >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>If video games and chess are your main uses for the machine I would think the >>>>>>>>>>>>>>AMD would be the better choice...especially for the money....I own a dimension >>>>>>>>>>>>>>8250 and while it surely performs well it was hardly worth the additional cost >>>>>>>>>>>>>>were i to only use it for chess. But in the end it really is just a question of >>>>>>>>>>>>>>personal preference. If both companies offer comparable service and support then >>>>>>>>>>>>>>its really a toss of the coin. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>Charles >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>P.S. The decision will also depend on what you plan for the machine in the >>>>>>>>>>>>>future. If you want to upgrade to a faster cpu later on or overclock your >>>>>>>>>>>>>current one then the AMD is the only option for you. Dell boards do not support >>>>>>>>>>>>>overclocking and Intel is notorious for often changing the socket on their cpus. >>>>>>>>>>>>>So you can pretty much rule out upgrading the Dell at all without >>>>>>>>>>>>>some_major_expense. Speed wise you are not going to see a huge world of >>>>>>>>>>>>>differece between the two machines. Assuming no overclocking you will get close >>>>>>>>>>>>>to 1200 kNs running fritz 8 on either. The hyperthreading will give you a 10 to >>>>>>>>>>>>>12% boost with the intel running Deep Fritz 7 but the strength difference is >>>>>>>>>>>>>negligible. >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>Charles >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>Thanks. But how do i overclock an AMD and is it safe? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Well, I am not an expert in overclocking but for mild overclocking, where no >>>>>>>>>>>additional cooling is required, i think you can just bump the cpu clock speed up >>>>>>>>>>>in bios say 10% or so safely (my figure may be inaccuarate). You may have >>>>>>>>>>>configure a jumper or two on the system board as well I am not certain about the >>>>>>>>>>>design of these boards. Aaron Gordon would be the one to pose this question to >>>>>>>>>>>as he has extensive knowledge of these boards and overclocking techniques. Sorry >>>>>>>>>>>I couldn't be more help. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>Charles >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>The same also applies to the dual 3.06 xeon system you emailed me the specs to >>>>>>>>>>as we have already discussed above. The xeon systems have decreased in price a >>>>>>>>>>bit though. For chess I would recommend a minimum of 1GB of RAM and 2 would be >>>>>>>>>>even better but like all things related to the computer it is a matter of what >>>>>>>>>>you can afford to sink into one. Dell's business machines are more flexible as >>>>>>>>>>far as upgradability than their residential machines however they still cannot >>>>>>>>>>be clocked up. My machine is automatically upgraded each time a newer or faster >>>>>>>>>>part comes out as per my contract with Dell. The day after the part is released >>>>>>>>>>a technician comes to install it. This contract includes motherboards, cpu's, >>>>>>>>>>and memory only. As far as overclocking goes there is little need to overclock a >>>>>>>>>>high end AMD or Xeon dual. They are both quite fast as it is and with the upper >>>>>>>>>>end cpu's if you try anything more than mild overclocking you will need >>>>>>>>>>additional cooling because these cpu's are already clocked close to the upper >>>>>>>>>>end of what the engineers say is the limit of the part. Taking a 2 GHZ part to >>>>>>>>>>2.5 GHz is much simpler than taking a 3GHz part to 3.5GHz. Like I said earlier >>>>>>>>>>though, these are questions best left to Aaron Gordon or one of the guys here >>>>>>>>>>who specialize in overclocking. Personally, with the current advances in cpu >>>>>>>>>>technology i think overclocking the high end parts is a bit silly when there are >>>>>>>>>>faster and faster cpu's coming to market constantly. Why take the risk when it >>>>>>>>>>isn't needed? Most overclocking is done on the lower end chips to bring them up >>>>>>>>>>to where the higher end chips are without putting out the expense for the high >>>>>>>>>>end one. I think Aaron would agree that overclocking a high end chip past it's >>>>>>>>>>safety margin would be unwise. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Sincerely, Charles >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Overclocking a high-end chip is fine as long as you know what you're doing. Also >>>>>>>>>as long as you run stability tests to ensure whatever cpu you're overclocking is >>>>>>>>>completely stable it doesn't matter if you're overclocking an AthlonXP 3000+ or >>>>>>>>>a 386SX-16MHz. Stable is stable. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>_IF_ it is verified. This is not easy. It means you have to run a program that >>>>>>>>specifically >>>>>>>>tests "edge conditions" by running sliding 1 patterns thru every instruction, to >>>>>>>>see if there is >>>>>>>>any unexpected cross-talk at higher frequencies, etc. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Just because it runs some application correctly, does _not_ mean it will run >>>>>>>>_all_ applications >>>>>>>>correctly. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>With all of the tests on my box that I've done I'd be willing to put money down >>>>>>>that it is 100% stable. I'll put up a linux shell to that particular box and you >>>>>>>can try everything in your power to crash it via cpu/memory/chipset/etc >>>>>>>instabilities, it's just not going to happen. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>You could be right. But then, does the _average_ overclocker do that much >>>>>>testing? >>>>>> >>>>>>Nope... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Well, every overclocker I know runs either burnk7 or prime95. Both of which will >>>>>knock your box down QUICK if there are any instabilities. There are sets of >>>>>tests people run. Usually it's Prime95/Burnk7 for the CPU, memtest86 for the >>>>>memory and hours of 3DMark2001SE for videocard testing (when overclocking the >>>>>videocard or AGP bus). >>>>> >>>>>Current Nforce2 boards allow you to lock the PCI and AGP at default speeds so >>>>>you don't have to worry about pushing your videocard and PCI devices beyond >>>>>specs. Thats something I really don't like doing, but have done it in the past >>>>>because it was necessarry to get higher bus speeds. >>>>> >>>>>Most people just going from say 2400+ to 2600+ really won't need much testing, >>>>>the chips can do a little bit without hardly any risk of instabilities. It's >>>>>just when you start pushing far above the manufacturers top cpu is when you need >>>>>the extreme testing. Mainly hardcore overclockers do this and they run the same >>>>>tests I do. >>>> >>>> >>>>I'm not going to comment on those programs. However, they very likely do _not_ >>>>represent the worst case for catching problems such as slightly long gate >>>>delays, or cross-coupling on traces, or instabilities at certain clock speeds. >>>> >>>>It's non-trivial and requires specific testing rigors. A prime number tester >>>>is serendipitous at best. It almost certainly doesn't execute all instructions, >>>>which is a problem... Not to mention all instructions with specific "tough" >>>>bit patterns (many adjacent 1 bits, many adjacent 0 bits, sliding 0101/etc >>>>patterns... etc.) >>> >>>Knock it all you want, there's no way you'll crash my box though. ;) >> >> >>I'm not knocking your box at all, as I said previously you have driven it to the >>lowest latency I have ever seen. But for every success story, there are a >>thousand >>horror stories. I've seen too many of 'em here. "It works fine on all the >>normal >>test programs but I am getting a program crash on my real application. When I >>turn the clock back down, it works fine." >> >>That's not the way to spend time debugging... > > >I read a post in the other topic where someone said that an AMD Athlon 2.16Ghz >is as fast as dual Xeon 2.8 Ghz. Is that true and how is that possible? Where >can i buy a dual AMD Athlon? It's possible because Intel engineered their chips to have high MHz, low instructions per cycle. Why? Great for marketing. Most people don't know MHz isn't everything. They think 2.5GHz is faster than 2.4GHz. When in actuality the P4 does much less "work" per cycle (2.5GHz cpu is 2.5 billion cycles). Athlon's do much more work, so they can run much less MHz and be faster. You can compare the P4-2.4 vs P4-2.53GHz, in this case more MHz the better. You can't compare a 2.4GHz AthlonXP to a 2.4GHz P4 though, as the Athlon would be nearly as fast as a P4-4GHz (My AthlonXP at 2.5GHz is faster than a P4-4GHz).
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.