Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 07:14:19 03/28/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 28, 2001 at 07:09:24, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>On March 27, 2001 at 18:23:26, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On March 27, 2001 at 15:00:51, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>>
>>>On March 27, 2001 at 14:06:03, Victor Zakharov wrote:
>>>
>>>>>>1) Two processors give 70% speed increase for chess program. Ok.
>>>>>> But doubling processor speed doesn't speed up computer 2 times too.
>>>>>> I suspect that speedup is about 70% for most programs too.
>>>>>> Memory system speed limits speedup.
>>>>>> May be some people here have benchmarks under their hands and can say
>>>>>> more exact number. But I am sure that speedup is strongly less than 100%
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>I hope some people with fast and slow computers will read this and will post
>>>>>their benchmarks.
>>>>>
>>>>>In particular we are very interested in benchmarks for the Athlon 600MHz and the
>>>>>Athlon 1.2GHz.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>I hope that there are persons here that will be able to compare nps for some
>>>>chess programs at Athlon 600MHz and Athlon 1.2GHz. It is essential that
>>>>conditions were equal. For example, hash size is 64MB and start position. Also
>>>>it is a good idea about equal motherboard and memory speed (PC133 or PC100).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>2) So the queston is only what is cheaper to buy the processor that
>>>>>> is two times faster or to buy a second processor.
>>>>>> For my mind two processors are cheaper. Sure you should have the adequite
>>>>>> motherboard.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The only problem is that not all the programs support 2 processors.
>>>>>> But there is another side of the medal. If you run some process on the
>>>>>> 1 processor computer it uses most processors resources and it is not easy
>>>>>> to do something else. With two processors you have no this problem.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So personaly I am using two processor board with great pleasure.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>That's something else. In my message I try to compute the difference in ELO
>>>>>between singles and duals, given the compromises you have to do to in order to
>>>>>get a dual.
>>>>
>>>>There are two problems here.
>>>>
>>>>1) Sure it is not reasonable to waste a lot of money for fastest available
>>>>system. You will not reach too much in chess with it. It is better to buy the
>>>>strongest program :-).
>>>>
>>>>2) If we consider two processors system and one processor system with the same
>>>>power the question what is cheaper?
>>>
>>>The problem is even worse. There are no 2Ghz AMD processors
>>>and there are no 2 Ghz PIII processors yet, so the only option is
>>>to buy a dual!!!!!
>>>
>>>>I think that for high end systems two processors system is cheaper. For example
>>>>system with ABIT VP6 motherboard and two PIII-1GHz is cheaper and faster than
>>>>any P-IV system. And it $300 more expensive that is the one processor 1GHz
>>>>system.
>>>
>>>Talking about price is not relevant here.
>>>
>>>Some people buy expensive ferrari but are not allowed to drive faster
>>>on the highway as i am allowed with my car.
>>>
>>>The real problem here is that Christophe tries to defend the statement
>>>that duals are not worth buying, which is essential the same statement as
>>>saying that buying a faster single cpu is not worth buying!
>>
>>
>>
>>Can you quote a single sentence in my original message that says that duals are
>>not worth buying?
>>
>>No you can't.
>>
>>What I notice is that you conclude this yourself from what I have written. ;)
>>
>>On my side, I have just written that by buying a dual you will get, if you have
>>a SMP chess program, 25 additional elo points, unless you are ready to pay for a
>>really bigger amount of money. And that 25 elo points means winning 3.5
>>additional games out of 100.
>>
>>From this you conclude that buying a dual is not worth it. Your words.
>>
>>I have only given some hard facts for people considering to buy one. So they
>>understand what they get for their money.
>
>So basically you conclude that ChessTiger gets 25 points extra from
>faster hardware.
>
>That means that Tiger is real soon outdated compared to competition
>which has already 3300 rating at ICC?
:) :) :)
You are very funny Vincent.
Christophe
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.