Author: stuart taylor
Date: 04:32:33 08/07/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 07, 2001 at 06:44:23, Adam Oellermann wrote: > >>>the 1400 mhz t-bird with one of the top programs can beat some GMs >>> most of the time. it cant beat some GMs all the time. >>> and it cant beat all GMs some of the time. >>> whew---did i cover them all. >>> >>> these guys will bite my head off if i say that this system would be GM >>> level all the time. >>> >>> what is your purpose for this purchase. server gaming, personal play, >>> depends on your purpose. if you plan on playing against your >>> program yourself, unless you are a GM, then any of the processors >>> are ok, intel or amd. the 800 mhz amd is cheap now. >>> if you plan on gaming at one of the chess servers, then you will need >>> the most mhz that your budget will allow. >>> >>> kburcham >> >> >>My true purpose is to get the most feautures and quality and speed possible for >>many personal uses, at this time, and would like to see how long I can look >>after it without upgrading again (unless a specific reason makes it necesary for >>some special business purpose). >> I'm particularly interested in chess playing use, which is not enough that it >>beats me easily, but that it provides me with the greatest analysis in a short >>amount of time for games and positions which I'm trying to analyze. >> Also, multi-media qualities should be as good as exists today. >>There should not be a quality in an Intel or anything of 1 Ghz. which isn't >>atleast as good in the amd 1400 even its weakest point.(for singal CPU, personal >>uses). >> But if the only difference in the world between AMD 1400 and 800mhz. is speed >>alone, and the difference in price is very high, then I'd prefer the 800. >> >>If you or anyone can answer me all this, then I would consider that quite a >>great help. and a mystery buster. >> >>Thanks >> >>S.Taylor > >The benchmarks I read indicate that for multimedia purposes (particularly >MP3/Windows Media/MPEG etc encoding/deconding) the P4 is way ahead. >Unfortunately, it is well behind the AMD processors in almost all other areas on >a MHz for MHz basis, including chess performance. > >- Adam Does that mean that p4 is just a little quicker for those things? (but that 1400 mhz. of AMD would be atleast as good as p4 would be, IF it were working at 1 Ghz)? S.Taylor
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.