Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 16:31:41 01/28/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 28, 2002 at 17:43:29, Jay Scott wrote: >On January 28, 2002 at 13:17:20, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>Photoshop and such rendering programs can make use of the velocity >>engine in the G4, which is of no use for computerchess > >I disagree. > > If Cray Blitz was able to get benefits from the Cray's long vectors with slow >startup times, then a chess program written for AltiVec should get bigger >benefits from the low-overhead short vectors of AltiVec. The architecture looks >like a good match to me. hello there? i should say take William H Rogers as example and first drink 3 cups of coffee and then conclude you are comparing 2 different things here. We have very fast L1 caches and processors nowadays and Crays are not even processors but some big massive things put on each other. Obviously L1 cache is not present (if i understood well). But memory speed versus L1 cache is no compare of course. So the whole comparision is WRONG here. Add to that that the velocity engine is for floating point, so how you plan to use that is a big mystery to me. Further add to that that the velocity engine is a big joke compared to what a Cray can do for you when talking about multiplication of big arrays. Did you ever make your own chess engine?
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.