Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: WinXP v Win2000 or DDR v SDRAM - help requested

Author: Shaun Brewer

Date: 05:05:42 10/09/02

Go up one level in this thread


On October 09, 2002 at 07:32:08, Joachim Rang wrote:

>On October 09, 2002 at 07:10:26, Shaun Brewer wrote:
>
>>I have just upgraded on of my machines from a TBird 850 to XP2000+ CPU change
>>only.
>>
>>I am happy with the result inexpensive and effective 2x performance for chess.
>>
>>I have done some comparisons with 2 friends machines they both have XP2000+
>>processors but with DDR ram I wanted to see what benefit this gave them.
>>
>>My machine KT133A (ABIT KT7A) chipset SDRAM cas 2
>>
>>Theirs:
>>
>>KT333 (ASUS board) PC2100 DDR
>>
>>KT400 (Gigabyte board) PC2700 DDR
>>
>>I took the first nunn position and let crafty think overnight 196mb hash 48mb
>>hashp - my results were better!!! I was expecting a significant boost for DDR
>>and the newer motherboards.
>>
>>Questions.
>>
>>Does anyone know if the following are the reasons?
>>
>>They are running XP rather than Win2000.
>>
>>I have the BIOS settings set fairly aggressively where as they are running
>>defaults.
>>
>>I am planning another upgrade and if there is 'minimal' difference for chess
>>between DDR and SDRAM I can save a fortune/avoid wasting a fortune as I have
>>been looking at expensive and fast DDR memory in a KT400 motherboard.
>>
>>Thanks
>>
>>Shaun
>>

Cut

>>

>
>I think this is because of the BIOS-Settings. These setings have an significant
>impact to the speed. I don't think, that WinXP consumes more CPU_ressources than
>W2K (the memory-allocation should be even better in XP). Probably it's the
>CAS-LAtency which matters. Maybe there were other factors like Antivirus-program
>in background. A good comparison is Fritz-Mark, but therefor one needs this
>program.
>
>I have only little experiences, but the difference between SDRAM and DDRAM seems
>quite small for chess.
>it's probably the CAS-Latency of 2 which matters.

Thanks for the reply,

Background tasks should not have been a problem as the task monitor was showing
99/100% usage.

Adjusting the biso I have got a few % in the past but I had realy expected to
see a significant differnce in favour of DDR.

At some point I might do a test install of XP so I can compare on identical
hardware. I was just hoping someone might have alreay done this and noted the
difference.

Thanks again

Shaun



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.