Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 20:39:22 04/12/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 12, 2003 at 22:44:09, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On April 11, 2003 at 16:53:59, Tom Kerrigan wrote: > >>On April 11, 2003 at 10:58:29, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>I have explained "why not" before. >>> >>>My configuration is a dual 2.8. I can't remove a CPU because I don't have a >>>terminator to >>>stick in the socket. So I am stuck with two. I can enable or disable SMT when >>>I boot the >>>machine. >>> >>>now tell me how to run the test. Two copies might run on one physical cpu >>>(using two >>>logical cpus). Or they might run on two physical cpus. I have no control over >>>that. And >>>they will bounce around between processors as they run. >>> >>>Your turn. Tell me how to run a valid test and I'll let 'er rip. >> >>Actually a friend of mine has access to a P4/3.06 and I ran the test myself. >>Took less than 5 minutes. >> >>I opened two instances of my program and had them search the same position >>simultaneously and compared their NPS after ~10 seconds. I did this three times. >>Task Manager showed that both logical processors were pegged. The NPS ratios >>were: >> >>51%-49% >>49%-51% >>48%-52% >> >>It's pretty darn obvious that HT does not favor one logical processor more than >>another. (Contrary to Hyatt and Vincent's assertions.) > >I do not see why this is contrary to my assumption. What i see is that SMT >improves nps with say 15%. How that is divided between the 2 processes i didn't >write down anything about here. "with SMT that is not the case. the second cpu in SMT delivers somewhere between 0% and 20%." -Tom
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.