Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 02:37:49 04/18/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 17, 2001 at 13:04:20, enrico carrisco wrote: >On April 17, 2001 at 08:58:35, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On April 17, 2001 at 00:23:21, enrico carrisco wrote: >> >>>On April 16, 2001 at 06:59:49, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On April 14, 2001 at 10:21:35, Frank Wolf wrote: >>>> >>>>>My friend and I are in disagreement regarding the seed (for chess) of the >>>>>following systems: Dual P3 at 1GZ with 512 SDRAM vs Athlon 1.33 with 512 SDRAM. >>>>>Which is faster and by how much. Any Fritzmark data out there with these >>>>>systems. He is going to lay down the cash for one of them. >>>> >>>>for now the dual P3 1Ghz is faster by a large margin of course >>>> >>>>2x1Ghz = 2Ghz >>>> >>>I'd love to see the math on this one. A conservative figure would be 1.7ghz and >>>a best case scenario would be 1.8ghz. >>> >>>-elc. >> >>2.0 for diep at tournament level. > >Sorry, I'm not familar with your parallel programming routines in diep. It >would appear, however, that Dr. Hyatt, Amir Ban, Frans Morsch, and Stefan >Meyer-Kahlen would have much to learn from you. Please do expand! Noop Bob doesn't need to learn a thing, just diep is slower as those progs and i'm using a modified Cray Blitz concept, so it's all open information. Amazingly i'm the only PC program using it (probably because it's so hard to implement, took me a year)! Do not forget my program searches 15 times slower as Fritz, so overhead to parallellism is *way* smaller. A small improvement in branching factor and DANG there you have 2.0 Also i'm splitting hardly near the leaves where all recursive programs keep on splitting near the leaves. That's the b.f. difference! Best regards, Vincent >-elc.
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.