Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 13:47:50 09/04/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 04, 2002 at 12:00:32, Robert Hyatt wrote: >Have I not said _many_ times that the parallel speedup is a very dynamic >value that can change significantly on the same position run multiple times? >have I not given you several examples of such? Do you not understand that you >can run a test once and get 2.8, and run it again and get 3.1? If you don't, >I can't help you at all. Your problem is that my testing included error analysis (*), and as far as I remember (again, dont have the data on this machine), the result was *not* compatible with a speedup of 3.1. The speedup for the same experiment *cannot* be two different values that are outside each others error margins at the same time. Your speedup in my test conditions was 2.8 plus or minus something. Not 3.1 plus or minus something. (*) Which is missing in your papers *everywhere*. In fact, it's exactly this that caused Vincent and me to discover your time numbers were questionale. -- GCP
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.