Author: Chris Carson
Date: 06:29:43 04/20/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 20, 2001 at 08:48:39, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On April 20, 2001 at 08:41:41, Chris Carson wrote: > >>Uri, >> >>ref: http://www.specbench.org/osg/cpu2000/results/cint2000.html >>Specint2000: >> Crafty >> Peak Peak Ratio >>P3 1.13GHZ 464 589 >>P4 1.5GHZ 536 497 >>AMD 1.33GHZ 539 759 >> >>For Crafty the AMD was best then the P3 followed by the P4. However >>for other programs the P4 was superior (thus the Peak overall improvement). >> >>However, the P4 was better for the TSCP chess programs: >> >>Ref: http://ucsu.colorado.edu/~kerrigat/bench/ >> TSCP >> MIPS Benchmark >>Pentium 4/1700 1891 >>Pentium 4/1500 1749 >>Athlon/1200 1338 >>Pentium III/1000 1168 >> >>As I read this data for the two programs, it depends on the chess >>program and other factors (compiler options, design, ...). >> >>How do you read this? >> >>Any other thoughts/reasons for the descrepancy? >> >>Best Regards, >>Chris Carson > >The P4 has a long pipe. And then there is the RDRAM problem. Both hurt >Crafty because the eval has so many if then else type comparisons. I've >seen the same sort of performance differences in every case it has been >tried. I was wondering about that. Thanks for clearning that up. :) Best Regards, Chris Carson
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.