Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:27:51 06/19/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 19, 2002 at 20:45:33, Keith Evans wrote: >On June 19, 2002 at 14:33:56, Tom Kerrigan wrote: > >>On June 19, 2002 at 13:10:42, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>I don't care about the 32 bit specint. I care about the fact that a >>>1.4ghz pentium runs Crafty at about 750K nodes per second. The 600mhz >>>21264 ran it at over 800K. And 600mhz is _not_ the fastest 21264 around. >>> >>>The 1ghz mckinley runs it twice as fast as that 1.4ghz pentium, 1.5M nodes >>>per second. _that_ is definitely "something to get excited about" IMHO.. >> >>So you like the 21264 and the McKinley. That's great. Maybe you can start a fan >>club, instead of posting to a thread where people are trying to have an >>intelligent conversation about 64-bit computing. >> >>-Tom > >Is there an easy way to compare a 1.4 GHz P3 to a 1 GHz McKinley and see where >this Crafty performance increase is coming from? I'm not at all familiar with >McKinley, but would it be possible to run a version of Crafty compiled for >32-bits on a McKinley and compare that to a Crafty compiled for 64-bits on >McKinley? Is this a dumb idea? If this isn't possible, then it's going to be >difficult to tell where the performance gain is really coming from. > >-Keith I don't know that you could do this. It would require that the compiler know how to implement 64 bit ints as 2x32 bits, which on a mckinley would be a waste of the compiler-writer's time...
This page took 0.01 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.