Author: Ron Langeveld
Date: 12:49:43 05/27/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 27, 2002 at 14:58:05, Jorge Pichard wrote: >On May 27, 2002 at 13:15:36, Ron Langeveld wrote: > >>On May 27, 2002 at 12:38:19, Jorge Pichard wrote: >> >>> AMD Still the one to beat, unbelievable but true, or do we need more testing? >>> >>>Jorge. >> >>It's not a question of more testing, it's a question of clarity on test methods. >>I used default settings, and a common motherboard, the Abit KR7A with the KT266A >>chipset. Maybe Slater used a bad performing chipset or memory, or fiddled with >>settings in a dubious way, I don't know. Only he can give us this insight. > >I wrote the statement "unbelievable but true, or do we need more testing? >Simply because a Pentium IV 2.53 is faster than any AMD 1.73 Ghz, and your AMD >1.73 Ghz is NOT performing a better fritzmarks. Sorry, but I can NOT believe >your report. Believe what you want. I get different lines and higher nodes/second with this commercial CB software. Who cares about fritzmarkes ? The results are reproducable, or do I really have to make .bmp files of my screens ? Take Hiarcs or Shredder and see which lines resemble your own on your hardware. What you give is a statement, not an argument. Simply saying that you don't believe me doesn't strengthen your case. > >Jorge.
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.