Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:06:25 07/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 03, 2003 at 19:58:22, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On July 03, 2003 at 19:32:37, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On July 03, 2003 at 18:55:19, Brian Richardson wrote: >> >>>On July 03, 2003 at 18:26:33, Slater Wold wrote: >>> >>>>What are your results with your current exe, on the Crafty 'bench' test? >>> >>> Elapsed SMP Raw >>> Version CPUs time time-to-ply NPS >>>Opteron 244 (1.7GHz) 19.03 2 28 22.857143 1976833 >>>Opteron 244 (1.7GHz) 19.03 1 43 14.883721 1234812 >> >>That leaves me pretty cold. Dual 2.8ghz xeon, SMT on: >> >>Total nodes: 122846715 >>Raw nodes per second: 2082147 >>Total elapsed time: 59 >> >>This is a different version (19.4) so the time is not really comparable, >>but the NPS is, and the xeon is faster than the opteron. That looks ugly, >>although it obviously means the opteron is running 32 bit mode only, and it >>isn't very happy doing it. Be nice to get real 64 bit boolean operations >>up and going. > >"Isn't very happy"? What's wrong with it? Simple. It is slower than a dual 2.8xeon box, yet it is AMD's latest. That's all I said. It is exactly what I meant. > What kind of #s does a dual Athlon >1.8GHz get? If the Opteron improves over the Athlon with 32 bit code (and I >suspect it does) it seems like there should be very little cause for complaint. >Add to that the fact that Opteron will almost ceratinly run 64 bit Crafty much >faster and we're talking about a 1st generation Opteron anyway. Rumor is, 2GHz >Opterons will be available on the 6th, and those should be 5% faster than your >dual 2.8 Xeon. Maybe. My dual 2.8 is already out of date, of course. dual 3.06's are shipping with a 33% faster FSB. But I commented on the potential for a real 64 bit compiler. But the 32 bit numbers don't excite me. > >-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.