Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:24:39 12/01/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 01, 2002 at 16:47:27, David Rasmussen wrote: >On December 01, 2002 at 12:37:02, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >> >>I haven't "chosen" anything, in fact. I just wrote the code. It has a pretty >>high memory bandwidth requirement, by design, and AMD is simply lagging there. >>It wasn't intended to be that way but Intel has done some good things with >>memory and it shows, at least for Crafty... > >Of course it shows that you've developed it on Intel's instead of AMD's (in the >x86 world). You might not be concious of this, but it's still a choice. If you'd >happen to have Athlons instead, you would have wondered why somethings were >slow, and tried to improve them. It's not like a program like Crafty cannot be >done on Athlons. There are many SMP programs that works better on Athlons than >on P4s. Memoryintensive applications too. > >/David Actually that did not happen. Crafty was initially developed on a cray. A real 64 bit machine. With more bandwidth in one processor than a roomfull of PCs...
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.