Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 12:35:58 01/24/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 24, 2002 at 15:03:41, Joshua Lee wrote: >I was wondering let's say you had two systems play each other one with a quad >700 or 900 with 1MB cache per cpu and the other 2MB how will this effect the >results if at all and how would a Dual P4 Xeon at 2.2Ghz compare? > >How i understood it was that a dual will get on average 1.7x the performance and >a quad 3.1x so for a 900Mhz 900x3.1 2.790Ghz >for the Dual P4 2.2Ghz 2200x 1.7 3.740Ghz but if this is the case why >would people shell out thousands and thousands of dollars for the P3 Xeons with >a meg or two of cache? I figured there must be a reason ... Maybe someone can >clear this up. Consider tasks where there are lots of disk hits like a database application. Typically, you will have most of the hits in a few frequently used pages. For applications like that, the bigger the cache, the better. You also want a lot of main memory. I bet that almost all Xeon sales are for database servers, Web servers or application servers. Probably, the Xeon architecture helps on hash tables. It won't do a thing for the computations to fill the hash, however. I suspect that chess is an OK application for Xeon type chips, but you would probably bet better off with faster CPU's instead.
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.