Computer Chess Club Archives

Search

Messages

Subject: Re: benchmark test for fun (and for Vincent)

Author: Eugene Nalimov

Date: 15:51:39 09/05/02

Go up one level in this thread

Dual Itanium (not Itanium2, as I suspect I am under NDA): 1.95

Thanks,
Eugene

On September 04, 2002 at 21:19:05, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>If anyone has the time, and a dual-cpu machine, would you run the following
>position to depth 13 using first one cpu, then restarting, and running it again
>with two processors?  Everything else at default values.
>
>2r2rk1/1bqnbpp1/1p1ppn1p/pP6/N1P1P3/P2B1N1P/1B2QPP1/R2R2K1 b - - 0 1
>
>That is kopec position 22, one of my favorites.  I am only interested in
>two numbers, the raw NPS for 1 cpu, and the raw NPS for two cpus.  I don't care
>about the times or anything, just the NPS...
>
>Please include your cpu/speed/vendor/etc...
>
>Vincent thinks that the 2-cpu test will slow way down in terms of NPS.  I
>can't reproduce it on my machines here.  Eugene can't reproduce it on Intel
>boxes, but the two AMD machines he has tried produce 1.4X the nps using two
>that it produces using 1, while my machines produce about 1.9X the nps...
>
>Thanks...

• Re: benchmark test for fun (and for Vincent) Brian Richardson 19:22:06 09/05/02
• Re: benchmark test for fun (and for Vincent) Robert Hyatt 16:59:28 09/05/02
  • Re: benchmark test for fun (and for Vincent) Eugene Nalimov 17:01:19 09/05/02
• Re: benchmark test for fun (and for Vincent) Slater Wold 16:17:10 09/05/02
  • Re: benchmark test for fun (and for Vincent) Robert Hyatt 17:00:13 09/05/02
    • Re: benchmark test for fun (and for Vincent) Slater Wold 21:01:54 09/05/02
      • Re: benchmark test for fun (and for Vincent) Robert Hyatt 08:13:51 09/06/02

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.