Author: Aaron Gordon
Date: 15:11:35 05/06/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 06, 2002 at 16:40:15, Keith Ian Price wrote: >On May 06, 2002 at 14:39:13, Aaron Gordon wrote: > >>On May 06, 2002 at 12:53:12, Keith Ian Price wrote: >> >>>On May 06, 2002 at 11:05:38, Rajen Gupta wrote: >>> >>>>On May 06, 2002 at 10:45:21, Dan Andersson wrote: >>>> >>>>>Good for them. But with the current speed of Athlon XP we will have to see a >>>>>2.9GHz P4 before even considering a switch for chess programs and FEA. >>>>> >>>>>MvH Dan Andersson >>>> >>>>i doubt it. someone here had posted the tiger and fritz mark on a pentium 4 >>>>northwood, about 10 days back(i forget the name of the poster, perhaps if he >>>>reads this he can respond)and it was identical to the benchmarks which others >>>>had posted of an athlon xp at 1600MHZ. This means that a pentium4 2.4 would >>>>atleast run as fast as athlon xp 1.73(the fastest currently available) and a >>>>pentium 2.53 would woud run somewhere between an athlonxp 1.83-1.87 9probably >>>>the latter in view of a faster FSB, faster memory and the superior scaling of a >>>>P4 at higher speeds as compared to an athlon xp. >>>> >>>>I greatly fear that amd have taken their eye of the ball and will forever be >>>>playing catchup, one lap behind >>>> >>>>rajen >>> >>>That was me. My 2.2 Ghz P4 is also used for rendering video, a task at which it >>>blows the doors off any AMD processor so far, which is why I got it, rather than >>>an AMD. The 2 ELO increase I could expect from the AMD 2100+ system over mine >>>wasn't enough of an incentive to render video at 75% of the speed. That and the >>>fact that a similarly equipped AMD system from HP or Compaq would have cost 50% >>>more. 60% if I tried to put one together myself at the time. Gateway is giving >>>away their high-end models to try and raise market share, so I was happy to >>>help. >>> >>>kp >> >>Since when has a P4 blown the doors off a properly configured AthlonXP in >>anything, especially video encoding & raytracing? Email me. Name the test and we >>can compare results.. > >You're right. The P4 2.2 is only 9% faster than the XP2000+ on MPEG-1 and >Mpeg-2. At the time, I was comparing the Athlon 2000+ vs. P4 2.2 at Tom's >hardware and I remembered a test which was a "blows the doors off" test, it must >have been this one for 3d rendering: > >http://www.tomshardware.com/cpu/02q1/020107/p42200-15.html > >In any case, I went for the Gateway because of the value for money, and the fact >that until the hammers come, there will only be a slight ELO advantage for the >Athlon. I may buy a couple hammers to run chess programs on. Until then, my P4 >does well enough to do analysis... > >kp Exactly. Tomshardware, Anandtech & similar sites do NOT test with full bios tweaks (or even partial). You can verify this by actually emailing the sites, getting the exact same hardware and running those exact same tests OR by emailing AMD. When doing such testing they make you disable absolutely everything. In most everything this results in a very large decrease in scores. If you build it yourself you could make a fully decked out AMD box for around $600 without monitor and have it easily beat the P4-2.4GHz (which costs $500+ just for the cpu). Would be nice if Intel's lawyers didn't harass AMD for every little thing (such as the bios tweaks). As far as chess goes.. take a peek at what a 2.1GHz (true 2.1GHz, not 2100+) AthlonXP can do in Fritz6 (Fritzmark w/ 5.32) and Fritz7 @ ftp://speedycpu.dyndns.org/pub/chess/xp-fritzold.jpg and ftp://speedycpu.dyndns.org/pub/chess/xp-fritz7.jpg. Also take peek at some crafty benchmarks.. http://speedycpu.dyndns.org/crafty/craftybench.jpg
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.