Author: Slater Wold
Date: 15:58:19 06/19/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 19, 2001 at 05:43:00, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On June 18, 2001 at 21:07:19, Slater Wold wrote: > >>These tests were run on a Dual Pentium III 1,000mhz, 1028MB RAM. >> >>Doesn't seem like the MMX optimizations do anything. This was a tad >>surprising. > >They require a good superscalar MMX unit on the cpu to give an >advantage. The one on the Athlons flies on that code. I don't >know how the PIII does, but it wouldn't be a suprise if the Athlon >turns out to be more efficient. > Well, Intel created MMX, so I am sure that theirs does what it's "supposed" to. About superscalar, that I am unsure. >BTW. Your comparisation is horribly broken. If you bench you should >get the EXACT SAME nodecount for all versions. If they are searching >different trees, something is broken somewhere and there is little >sense in comparing the produced nps. Crafty is funny about this. Perhaps only Bob knows why, but when you have a PIII 1,000mhz and a PIII 500mhz the total node count are COMPLETLY different. However (and this coming from Bob) they run the _SAME_ exact FEN's. And also, SMP is very unpredicatable of where it will branch, and running 10 benches might produce 10 branches. All in all, it's the same 6 FEN's and searching for the same time. Slate
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.