Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 05:35:19 09/26/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 26, 2002 at 08:22:14, Jorge Pichard wrote: >It is customary for intel to compare a higher clock CPU with a much lower clock >AMD CPU, for Instance, the latest P4 2.8 Ghz vs AMD XP 2200 Ghz. Sure they give >creidit to a better memory, but this type of comparison is like comparing Apples >and Oranges. > >http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,104165,00.asp Crafty at AMD XP2600+ 2.133ghz Epox 8KHA+ Motherboard and CL2 ddr ram: 75.5 seconds base run time Crafty at 2.8Ghz P4 533Mhz bus and PC800-ECC RDRAM: 93.5 seconds base run time you can see the results yourself for amd: http://www.specbench.org/osg/cpu2000/results/res2002q3/cpu2000-20020812-01551.html for intel: http://www.specbench.org/osg/cpu2000/results/res2002q3/cpu2000-20020909-01639.html This is the *official* specbench mark. both manufacturers did their best to produce optimal versions of each product. Intel even uses its own compiler. Without this buggy compiler (for DIEP it is buggy, i do not know for others; it gets a lot of nps that compiler at intel processors but not giving correct evaluations and it is NOT a bug in diep, i found out in compiler what is the problem as posted before) they would be again hell slower. I am not sure whether Bob has verified whether that compile from intel is a bugfree compile; whether it plays as good when using big hashtables like a default compile of visual c++ or even latest gcc version. Getting a zillion nodes a second doesn't say much about all nodes being non-random :) So reality is that the above result in reality is even more positive for AMD than it looks like. We simply cannot trust these intel c++ compiles. Best regards, Vincent
This page took 0.03 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.