Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 16:18:32 01/19/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 19, 2001 at 18:42:58, David Wilke wrote: >On January 19, 2001 at 18:19:51, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On January 19, 2001 at 09:13:57, David Wilke wrote: >> >>>It has been stated by Robert many times that Crafty is blazing fast on an Alpha >>>processor. >>> >>>If this is the case, why wouldn't he use Alphas to run Crafty on the chess >>>servers instead of the big gun Xeons? >>> >>>What would be the actual cost of a Quad processor Alpha machine? >>> >>>And how much faster would Crafty be on that hardware? >> >>Recently (november) a dual mainboard came out for alpha at 866Mhz. >>Around 2500us$ ONLY for the motherboard. >>And correct me if i'm wrong, but it doesn't give a hardware 2.0 speedup. >> >>A cool MSI dual 694d motherboard allows processors (PIII fcpga) at >>like 1Ghz or above. It's $200 at most. >> >>So it's realistic to say alpha's are about 10 times pricier. >> >>A 16 processor alpha recently sold for 8.5 million dollar. >>I forgot the speed of the alpha's on that system. somewhere between 450 >>and 600 Mhz i think. >> >>Also it's not realistic to assume that we'll see alpha's in the stores >>breaking the 1 Ghz barrier in dual motherboards. >> >>If a dual alpha 21264 would be not too expensive i might just for >>fun buy one, but just $2500 for the motherboard to start with is >>not exactly big fun. >> >>That's out of my price range for sure. The 866Mhz speed i don't >>even complain about as it's not realistic to expect any production >>64 bits machine with so many registers like the alpha has to >>get over 1 Ghz. >> >>It's more realistic to say that it might take 2 years before we >>see that. AMDs will be running probably dual then at 2 Ghz for >>less as 1/10 of alpha prices. > >Yes, I have tested an Athlon 900Mhz vs a PIII 900 Mhz, and the PIII was still >able to win the WinBench 99 benchmark score, by 11% in fact. > >Also testing the Fritz mark between the two, the PIII was significantly higher. >Even with the processor patch for Windows. > >Many have the Athlon, and if they are only using it for everyday tasks, I would >say it was fine, but for overall hardcore gaming, and processor intensive >applications, I would suspect that the PIII would out perform 99% of the time. Athlon alway shave been faster for me as PIII. but the 900Mhz is suspicious. i'm talking here about a high clocked 1Ghz PIII. Not the 900Mhz version which still might not be the new cCo core. >I will be testing a P4 1.5Ghz machine in a couple of days, and I suspect it will >destroy the Athlon. winbench is doing things that are not very interesting for chessprograms. chessprograms are basically busy with integer performance. Please test a program like Fritz on the P4 also Tiger and some other chessprograms! It's real cool to know their speed on the P4. Crafty is already known as crafty is part of the specint2000 testset it's results are posted already. Crafty is very slow on P4.
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.