Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Ok, I am going to bed, my last comment:

Author: Aaron Gordon

Date: 12:43:31 05/27/02

Go up one level in this thread


Of course. Without a proper setup you can make the nicest system run like
absolute crap. The via 4in1 drivers for example contain and AGP driver required
for proper operation. Tons of people were complaining, "Why is my AMD box only
getting 1,300 in 3DMark 2000 and blah blah blah"... or something similar (low
results). After they installed the latest 4in1's their score jumped up to
~5,000-8,000. Just goes to show what a little bit of knowledge can go. I've seen
SO many pages that have done this. Not even bothering installing the 4in1's off
the CD even.

I'm sure you have done a lot of testing and I know you're only trying to do us a
favor and we do appreciate that. Unfortunately when this testing isn't done
properly it is a complete waste. The CPU, Motherboard, RAM, Videocard, etc all
play a huge part in the testing obviously. You can have a 1.73GHz AthlonXP, the
best ram, the best video card but a horrible board in terms of performance and
actually end up having a much slower system run circles around it. Chipsets make
a huge difference. Some aren't nearly as effecient as others (KT266 @ 50%,
KT266a @ 95-97%. KT133a is also 95-97%, KT133 is only %50 or so).

Even if you buy a $1000 board like my friend did way back in the day does not
mean you're getting a 'fast' board or one with more options. A friend of mine
(not too knowledgable about computers at the time) decided to get a $1000 tyan
board and two 400MHz Xeon CPU's for $1200 each. He figured with it being so
expensive how can it NOT beat my box? Well, was it fast? Yes. Could it even come
close to my $200 (board+cpu) Celeron 300 @ 644Mhz on an Abit BH6? Nope. It was
even faster at only 450-504mhz. That was the last Intel box he got actually.. I
kept up with the Celerons for a while. They aren't exactly fast but are fun to
overclock. Now, for the non-overclockers. Getting such boards ($80-100
overclockers boards, Epox 8KHA+, 8K3A, Abit KT7a, KR7, etc) will provide the
best performance even when not overclocking due to all the tweak options &
whatnot.

Also Slate, I HAVE done testing against a P4's. I haven't tested against any of
the 2.2GHz+ P4's or the northwoods directly but I did pit my box and some of my
older box's against a P4-2GHz. I made sure both computers were running idental
OS's, benchmark settings, drivers, etc. I was totally fair in all tests
optimizing both computers as much as possible. Yes, my two main AMD machines did
kick the hell out of it quite easily. When I get the money up I'll try to "rent"
a P4-2.53 and two of the fastest boards (one for DDR, one RDRAM) and test it
again. As you have seen in some of my previous tests I did run some tests
against some northwoods (crafty benchmark for example) where even the old
overclocked Thunderbird had a good edge over a 2465MHz Northwood P4 with a bus
of almost 550MHz.  Also you forget to mention that the "mflops" in sisoft Sandra
for the P4 are with the P4 using SSE2. The AthlonXP was NOT using 3DNow/SSE. Try
comparing the results of the straight P4 fpu to the straight AthlonXP FPU.
Doesn't seem like you're even trying to play fair...



On May 27, 2002 at 09:46:12, Slater Wold wrote:

>Come on man.  This was MY comparison, and for sure, the last comparison I ever
>do for CCC.
>
>1.) I wasn't comparing money.  Who cares about money.  If I wanted to compare
>money, would I have bothered actually BUYING the equipment?  Of course not!  I
>would have just made a list of what costs how much, and that would have been it.
> MY test was to see which CPU was faster.
>
>2.) I did everything I could to make sure this test was as "equal" as possible.
>I used the same exact programs, I used the same exact drivers, hell, I even used
>the same video card in some tests.  But that's not good enough.  I didn't use
>the correct EXE, or I didn't use the right BIOS settings.
>
>I am sitting here, in front of an AMD 1.73Ghz, beside me, an Intel P4 2.53Ghz.
>I have run application after application, and I am here to tell you, that P4 is
>faster.  PERIOD.
>
>Send me the EXEs, settings, driver, whatever you'd like.  But I am telling you,
>I've been up for 23 hours now, doing this shit.  I've seen it all with my own 2
>eyes.  When you have a P4 sitting next to you, then come talk to me.
>
>
>Good nite.



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.