Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: the empire strikes back

Author: Tom Kerrigan

Date: 14:15:11 01/10/02

Go up one level in this thread


On January 10, 2002 at 05:52:34, Ricardo Gibert wrote:

>You already mentioned SMT. This is one way of making a chip perform better
>without clocking it higher, so there is no reason to accept your "_only_" as
>true.

I meant single-thread performance, sorry if I didn't make that clear.
Single-thread performance is ultimately the most important thing in computer
performance, because you can always parallelize chips later. I'd much rather
have one single Pentium 4 than a couple hundred 486s in parallel.

>I would accept that whether a higher IPC or higher clockability is better is
>*not* a settled question, so saying that the P4 is inferior, because it employs
>an inferior strategy is unwarranted.

I believe it is a settled question. Microprocessor people call this the brainiac
vs. speed demon contest, and it was won by speed demons. There is no question in
my mind that Intel is doing the right thing by going after higher clock speeds.

http://www.mdronline.com/mpr_public/editorials/edit13_17.html

-Tom



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.