Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:07:55 08/27/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 27, 2001 at 14:03:16, Slater Wold wrote: >On August 27, 2001 at 13:17:09, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On August 27, 2001 at 12:41:10, Slater Wold wrote: >> >>>On August 27, 2001 at 10:46:20, Ulf Flörsheimer wrote: >>> >>>>In the notations it usually has been told of version 18.10x. What does x mean? >>>>Was it Crafty 18.10 or 18.10 with a special opening book? Or was it a unreleased >>>>version 18.11? If so, when will it be ready for download. >>>> >>>>I like both style and playing strength of crafty. Its Maastricht-games were >>>>really impressive. In my opinion Crafty is one of the most underestimated >>>>programs. It definitively prooved in Maastricht once more its legitimate >>>>placement among all the professional programs. >>>> >>>>I hope that crafty's further developement will be as successful as it has been >>>>in the past. >>>> >>>>Good luck for Bob Hyatt and a big "thank you" for the fun he has given to me >>>>with crafty! >>>> >>>>Ulf Floersheimer >>> >>>Bob said earlier, it's the _SAME_ exact version running on ICC now. >>> >>>However, it was on a 2x1.4Ghz AMD, which is a _LOT_ faster than his 4x700. >>> >>>So it packed a little more punch than usual. >>> >>> >>>Slate >> >> >>The 2x AMD is roughly the same as my quad 700. >> >>quad benchmark is 1.2M nodes per second (gcc/linux) >>dual AMD is 1.2M using MSVC/win2000. >> >>Actually, that makes my quad about 10% faster, since gcc is about 10% >>slower than MSVC... > >Weird. My AMD 1.2Ghz gets about 800k nps. I thought for sure a 2x1.4Ghz would >do better. At least 1.5M. That's the beauty of SMP! > > >Slate The one we had would only do 1.2M... no idea if there are better ones around, of course... I don't quite follow the math to think that 2x1.4 would be more than 50% faster than 2x1.2 however...
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.