Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Why the 'cold' processor is _correlated_ with better performance

Author: Tom Likens

Date: 10:42:36 04/26/02

Go up one level in this thread



The physics is correct, but the understanding of how a microprocessor works
is incorrect.  A microprocessor runs off a fixed rate crystal and PLL, which
do *not* vary with temperature even if they have been running for hours, days,
weeks or months.  Of course, there is cycle-to-cycle jitter and long-term
drift but good phase-lock loops (PLL) compensate for these effects.

When the microprocessor is designed it is designed based on a fixed cycle time
for the system.  In other words, a 1-GHz CPU has a cycle time of 1ns between
rising edges of the system clock and everything must happen in that 1ns
cycle time (exactly what must happen depends on the architecture- is it
pipelined, superscalar etc).  Before taping out the chip it is tested against
all the process corners to verify that it works at low voltage, high
temperature, slow silicon or high temperature, low temperature and fast
silicon, etc. etc. This is where most hardware designers spend their time.

But (and this is the important part) unless it is an asynchronous design, it
will *NOT* run any program faster if you cool off the system or raise the
voltage.  Yes, the actual silicon will be faster, but that matters
not one wit. If it works it works, regardless of these other conditions.
That's the beauty of synchronous design and it's what makes the chip industry
possible.  The processing speed, which is the part chess software cares about,
is fixed by the crystal and the system's operating frequency.

Binning parts is a whole different matter.  When you bin parts you test them
at manufacturing test to find out how fast the will reliably run and then you
select a crystal of the appropriate speed.  Also overclocking a chip refers
to running the basic clock frequency faster (for example our 1ns cycle time
now becomes 900ps and thus we do the same amount of work in less time).

regards,
--tom


On April 25, 2002 at 15:19:58, David Dory wrote:

>On April 24, 2002 at 23:37:50, Ratko V Tomic wrote:
>
>>>"It's just physics -- the longer a processor runs, the more it heats up and the
>>>less efficient it becomes.  Your program will play better chess right after you
>>>turn your computer on than it will after the machine's been running for hours or
>>>even days"
>>>
>>>Say what??
>>
>
>What the original quote referred to is that as a conductor heats up, the
>resistance increases. Basic physics/electricity.
>
>If the CPU continually increased in temperature, of course, it would be true,
>but then your CPU would be a puddle of silicon, etc. Of course, that's not the
>case at all. Never was that way that I'm aware of.
>
>Since modern CPU's heat up so high, so quick, this isn't a factor. I can recall
>testing many a 286/386 where _only_ a test done in the first 3-5 seconds would
>give you the highest CPU performance index. After that it leveled out, and never
>would give you the very best index again until you shut it off for quite a while
>and let it cool all the way down.
>
>darrz



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.