Author: Eugene Nalimov
Date: 20:42:45 11/11/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 11, 2003 at 22:41:08, Aaron Gordon wrote: >[...] >I was just stating at this point it would be easier, and the best bet, to use a >quad Opteron now rather than spend countless hours redoing the entire engine >before an important match. You can get a good speed boost without optimizing. >Just install it on the quad and let it rip. >[...] My point is: it's possible that due to the fact that quad Opteron is NUMA -- not SMP -- system, for SMP-only program performance on quad Opteron can be worse than on *real* quad SMP system, even when for one CPU Opteron performance is much better. Itanium was used only as an example of such system, I never recommended rewriting any program for it. I was answering to your words "quad Opteron should be much better than quad Xeon". Yes, there are applications on which quad Opteron shines (NUMA-aware Crafty is one of such applications). And yes, on other applications its performance it much worse, so much worse that slower but "real" SMP system will beat it (Crafty prior to 19.5 is one of such applications). Unfortunately, nor you not I have real numbers, so let's finish that discussion. Please understand -- I am not telling that Opteron is bad (IMHO it's good), or that Itanium in general is faster (though it is really faster on lot of code), or even that for Fritz Xeon is really better. I just pointed to some flaw in your logic... 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.