Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:37:43 09/27/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 27, 2002 at 14:45:13, Joachim Rang wrote: >On September 26, 2002 at 11:16:06, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On September 26, 2002 at 08:35:19, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>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 >> >> >> >>Yes... But the Intel duals are blowing the AMD duals out of the >>water, totally.. >> >>AMD appears to win the "single cpu war" at the moment. But on the >>duals (and beyond) they are _way_ behind intel's performance. >> >> > >I can't agree. In Germany there were a match between Deep Shredder and Deep >Fritz on 2xAthlon MP2000+ against 2+IntelXeon 2,4 Ghz. > >The match was specifically designed to compare the performance of these two >(four) processors. Each combination was played (Shredder/Fritz - AMD/Intel) > >In total they played 598 games > >they draw 280 gmaes >Intel won 164 >AMD won 154 > >a pretty close result I would say, which let us conclude, that Athlon MP 2000+ >is equal to Xeon 2.4 Ghz (for chess). > >Maybe Stefan Meyer-Kahlen and MAthias Feist cannot produce good code for Intel, >or Bob cannot produce good code For AMD MP ;-) > >Source, unfortunately only in german :-( > >http://www.heise.de/ct/schachduell/default.shtml > >P.S.: Why played all participants of WCCC 2002 on Dual-Athlon - Boards and not >on Intel XEON? Dual athlons are _cheaper_??? The result you quote above has _nothing_ to do with the speedup number I mentioned. What is the difference between 1.4X and 1.7X? Not enough to make a significant difference in a match. But if you look at raw NPS, Intel is going to win on dual boards, or at least they have won every test I have seen to date... > >> >>> >>>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. >> >> >>I have to provide them with several test sets that must match my node counts >>_exactly_ for them to "validate" their executable. Therefore there is little >>doubt that their compiler is working fine. I only use the Intel compiler now >>and it works perfectly. >> >> >> >>> >>>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. >> >>Sure you can. I have tested the 6.0 release of their compiler exhaustively, >>comparing various optimizations with a known good executable from gcc 2.95.2, >>and the intel compiler is producing perfect code from a comparison of the >>two... >> >>> >>>Best regards, >>>Vincent
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.