Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 05:50:09 12/05/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 04, 2002 at 20:19:16, Matt Taylor wrote: >On December 04, 2002 at 18:35:16, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On December 04, 2002 at 11:09:14, Matt Taylor wrote: >> >>>On December 04, 2002 at 08:00:35, martin fierz wrote: >>> >>>>hi, >>>> >>>>i'm on the lookout for a new PC for endgame database computations. i'll probably >>>>be buying a lot of ram, 2-3GB. i see that there is a big price difference >>>>between DDRAM and SDRAM. IIRC the main difference is that you get a larger >>>>bandwidth, but about the same latency with DDR - so i suppose i'm better off >>>>buying SDRAM for my application. any opinions of the experts? >>>> >>>>thanks in advance >>>> martin >>> >>>If you are working with a database, bandwidth is going to be important. Latency >> >>i do not know which databases you use or how big your queries are, >>but if i browse in immense databases, then latency is very very important :) >> >>In which case DDR ram is exactly 2 times faster. >> >>O yes, also over 2 times cheaper too :) > >It is cheaper, which is why my home system is AMD instead of Intel. Actually, >you could make the argument that low-end AMD-based DDR systems running in >parallel have higher overall performance than an RDRAM system. If it is true >that latency is the issue, then SDRAM would further lessen the cost, >particularly since you can pair it with lower-end chips (cheaper) without taking >a performance hit. > >I saw your computation of latency in the other post, but pc1066 RDRAM is also >clocked at 133 MHz. This would be an overall latency difference of 50%, not >100%. Yes i know that's why i said default RAM. look at the price of pc1066 and look at how i could possibly put it in dual Xeon systems. Note that the Xeons that get sold right now just like the P4s (< 3.06ghz) not a single one of them has SMT working well. >As for the database, the latency vs. bandwidth bottleneck depends on your >hashing algorithm, I suppose. I was assuming that most queries could be >satisfied serially. After thinking about it, I'm not sure. I've never used an >end-game database, but I am interested enough now that I may implement one when >I get a little free time.
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.