Author: Eugene Nalimov
Date: 14:38:38 11/11/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 11, 2003 at 08:50:53, Aaron Gordon wrote: >It would be better had they used a quad or 8-way Opteron running 2GHz or more. >From some testing I've done in the past you can figure a single Opteron 2GHz == >a P4-3.6GHz in Fritz 8 (32bit mode). So, a Quad Opteron 2.0 == Quad P4-3.6. >Almost 30% faster, plus the memory bandwidth available would probably push it a >bit over that with large hash table sizes. 8-way Opteron 2.0 would of course be >like 8 p4-3.6's (however with some 40gb/s+ memory bandwidth available depending >on bus speed). > >Why not use the best hardware? Seems like if you'd want to promote your new >'awesome' chess program you'd want to give it the best chance of winning. I am not so sure that for SMP program that is not NUMA-aware quad Opteron will be faster than quad Xeon, even if single-CPU Opteron is faster than single-CPU Xeon. At least it was so for Crafty. Before we modified it to be NUMA-aware, 1.8GHz Opteron was faster than 1.5GHz Itanium, but quad 1.4GHz Itanium was faster than quad 1.5GHz Opteron. Actually, Itanium was slightly faster even on 2 CPUs. Thanks, Eugene
This page took 0.01 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.