Author: Slater Wold
Date: 21:01:54 09/05/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 05, 2002 at 20:00:13, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On September 05, 2002 at 19:17:10, Slater Wold wrote: > >>Could you set me up a telnet account on that machine? >> >>K, thanks! > > >you are pretty stupid. Wouldn't you _really_ prefer an account >on the itanium2 that he can't talk about? > >:) LOL - Geez, don't hold back! I retract my statement and would like to have a telnet account on both please. :) > > >> >>;) >> >>On September 05, 2002 at 18:51:39, Eugene Nalimov wrote: >> >>>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...
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.