Author: Eugene Nalimov
Date: 14:41:58 04/24/01
Go up one level in this thread
The problem with P4 is that you have to recompile you application with compiler that knows something about P4. But when it is recompiled, it's usually faster, sometimes much faster. I.e. GCC on P4/1.5GHz is almost 2 times faster than on Athlon/1.33MHz, 186 seconds vs. 363 (for the ref data set). You can find details on http://www.spec.org/osg/cpu2000/results/cpu2000.html. For the current productivity applications Athlon is usually better. Eugene On April 24, 2001 at 17:19:47, Hristo wrote: >On April 24, 2001 at 16:55:46, Eugene Nalimov wrote: > >>Why you are posting results of obsolete Spec95, not of the current Spec2k? Apple >>did not submit later ones? If so, I think we all know why. > >I was not able to find comparable results for all of these systems! >Apple officialy has posted only SPEC95 results. It is a pdf somewhere >on their web site. > >> >>BTW, Intel posted Spec2k results for P4/1.7GHz (on Intel's site, not on the >>official SPec site). SpecInt is 586, which is better than any other published >>result. I.e. Alpha can be better for Crafty, you can built zillion-CPUs Alpha >>computer, etc., but for the reasonable mix of the integer programs fastest >>single-CPU computer is based on Intel's CPU. > >probably (very likely) so. I'm in agreement here! :-) >Although, Athlons are very (VERY) reasonable and fast >for the most part I get Athlons to outperform PIII at the >same frequency doing int and fp stuff. >If moving big chunks of data then PIIIs are better. > >hristo > > >> >>Eugene >> >>On April 24, 2001 at 16:31:47, Hristo wrote: >> >>>On April 24, 2001 at 10:05:26, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On April 24, 2001 at 08:37:04, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 24, 2001 at 03:33:29, Trefor Deane wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Are all the best Chess Programs only written for the PC,Can anyone please >>>>>>recommend any Chess Programs for Apples G4 processor? Here in the UK we don't >>>>>>seem to have the same choice that you guys have. >>>>>>Thanks >>>>>> >>>>>>Tref. >>>>> >>>>>Apple is everything but helpful. I emailed them last 2 weeks >>>>>and they don't want to say a thing. I have no idea how slow diep would >>>>>be on a G4, they only make PR for how fast their FPU (called velocity >>>>>engine at the g4) is. >>>>> >>>>>My sister has a dual G4 at home, so i'll compile DIEP there one day. >>>>>However for programmers G4 isn't interesting in advance as it >>>>>runs at most at 733Mhz and dual at 533Mhz. Compare that to a dual 1Ghz intel >>>>>and within a few months dual 1.5Ghz K7 !! >>>> >>>> >>>>That doesn't say a thing. Compare a 600mhz 21264 to a 1.5ghz intel. The >>>>21264 will blow the doors off the Intel processor in any benchmark. The >>> >>>true to some degree ;-) the Alphas are good, indeed, but the >>>G4 are over-rated ... this is not to say that the G4 is bad, >>>however it is nowhere near an alpha and it is on par with >>>PIII and Athlon at the same frequency. >>> >>>--- SPEC-95 results --- >>>-------------------- int --- fp --- >>>ALPHA 21264 667MHz 44 66 >>>PowerPC G4+ 773 32.1 23.9 >>>AMD Athlon 750 32.9 25.4 >>>PIII Xeon 733 35.6 30.4 >>> >>> >>> >>>>G* processors are very very good, even without outlandish clock rates. Does >>>>it really matter if the cpu runs at 1.5 ghz if it can't get data to/from memory >>>>that fast? >>>> >>>>Bus speed is also important... Intel is lagging there. >>> >>>Didn't they boost their bus speed ... with the right memory and chipset >>>they have 2.5 times the troughput of the best G4 ... I read this >>>somwhere, however the actual site is escaping me at the moment. ;-) >>>Please take this with a grain of salt. >>> >>> >>>hristo
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.