Author: Slater Wold
Date: 14:21:10 03/23/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 23, 2002 at 17:07:53, Sune Fischer wrote: >On March 23, 2002 at 15:58:19, Tom Kerrigan wrote: > >>On March 23, 2002 at 09:53:13, Dan Andersson wrote: >> >>>As seen in: >>>http://www.aceshardware.com/read.jsp?id=45000312 >>>A chess program using traditional work scheduling algorithms will not be using >>>the Hammer architecture at its most effective. But it won't be all that bad due >>>to the HyperTransport tunnels. And high bandwidth memory. A funny consequence of >>>the architecture is that SMP multiprocessing is achieved by having software >>>drivers. >> >>I don't know what you mean by "traditional work scheduling algorithms" but the >>Hammer will be great for running chess programs out of the box. The only way to >>make it faster would be to recompile the programs for x86-64, which reportedly >>yields a 10-15% performance gain. > >The Hammer is a 64-bit chip, I expect it to bring a lot more than just 10-15% in >chess, more like 100-150% for those progs with bitboards. > >-S. You're dreaming. Alpha's don't get *anywhere* near that kind of gain. More like the 10-15% that Tom said. > >>-Tom
This page took 0.02 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.