Author: Jeremiah Penery
Date: 15:15:54 03/25/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 25, 2002 at 08:48:54, Sune Fischer wrote: >On March 25, 2002 at 08:00:18, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On March 25, 2002 at 07:52:12, Sune Fischer wrote: >> >>>On March 25, 2002 at 07:05:26, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>The only INTERESTING thing is how fast a processor + compiler performs >>>>for a program. If you build a 1Ghz processor, then it gotta beat >>>>a 2Ghz K7 simply. If it doesn't, THEN YOU ARE SLOWER. >>> >>>Actually, it might beat it: >> >>>"In SPEC CFP2000 the Alpha 21264A running at 667MHz can outperform our beloved >>>AMD Athlon at over 2x the clock speed, not to mention that Intel's own Itanium >>>only runs at 800MHz while providing even higher scores." >> >>that's the floating point unit Sune. not a single chessprogram is >>using much floating point. also floating point isn't faster than >>integers (otherwise we could rewrite stuff to floating point). >> >>Just look how fast the best prepared alpha machine at specINT is >>completely outgunned by XP2000 (=mp2000). > >That is true when talking about the Alpha, it was probably not designed to be >very integer fast, I've even heard it couldn't do integers, that it would just The Alpha is just as much faster than other processors in Integer operations as it is in FP ones. >cast from floats. Don't know if that is true or not, but why would the Hammer >have the same weakness? >Look at the specs for the Hammer, it looks as though it will be 2x faster at >64-bit int-operations. 2x faster than what? Everything I've read indicates the Hammer will be about 25% faster than the AthlonXP clock for clock in 32-bit mode, and going to 64-bit mode will give another 15-20% speed boost, mostly due to the extra GP registers. Maybe for a bitboard-based program like Crafty, it would get even more of a speed boost.
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.