Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 09:42:11 12/18/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 18, 2002 at 00:21:38, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On December 17, 2002 at 16:45:37, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On December 17, 2002 at 11:46:57, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On December 17, 2002 at 11:29:19, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>hello Bob, >>> >>>please do the same tests i did with DIEP too with crafty. >>> >>>Of course as you always say that doing a few tests proof nothing, >>>please repeat them twice. >>> >>>For me doing a test twice with crafty is sufficient. >> >>I generally say "your doing a few tests proves nothing." "Why?" you ask? >>Because >>you seem incapable of understanding simple ideas. Remember your nonsense about >>"on a dual Crafty runs _no_ faster at all here..."??? So if I remain a bit >>suspicious of > >it was not doing anything weird that test. i was running analyze modus in >crafty and you have no asymmetric king safety. I did all my tests like >that in fact with crafty *always*. wonder why you have different forms >of crafty within the same program even! > For analysis so that the eval doesn't flip-flop as a move is made on the real board. And, for the record, analyze mode produces the _same_ speedups as does the normal mode. The times might be different since the eval is different. The depths might even be different, but the speedups are the _same_. And this is easy for anyone to verify. >why not always turn it off or on? Because I like the way it plays in normal mode. But I prefer to avoid the questions "why is suddenly black almost a pawn ahead when before white's move white was ahead?" > >note i also have a dual K7. > >Well i guess you gotta pay a price to get a wintel license... >...your choice. No idea what that means... > > >>any number(s) you report, there is a reason for it... >> >> >>I ran 24 positions twice and reported the NPS for 1 thread, no SMT, two threads, >>no SMT, >>three threads, SMT on, and four threads, SMT on. >> >>What more can I run??? > >you could email it to diep@xs4all.nl those runs. i love to >calculate it with an objective calculator. yours also probably >didn't show a 12.7% speedup for the position below. > >it's impossible for me to believe crafty having a nps speedup >better than 20% for SMT (2 threads with SMT turned off >versus 4 threads smt turned on). I don't care _what_ is "impossible for you to believe", personally. I ran the tests. Eugene ran the test. Others have run the test. The numbers come us similar for everyone. > >20% is the maximum HT as is in the 2.8 Xeon could give >to a decent program. Based on what? Your "proof". As I thought... > >No 100% like in Nalimov dreams. No 30-50 either. Someone is mistaken. I know who I put _my_ money on. > >> >>> >>>I am especially interested in the completed logs too so that we all can >>>see what mainline you took to compare the speedup and absolute speeds >>>in nps. >> >>All I reported was NPS. I'm not going to post such a huge wad of output here. >>I will >>take one position from each of the four tests and give you those. I have no >>idea what you >>mean by "what mainline you took to compare the speedup and absolute speeds in >>NPS." >>I didn't take _any_ mainline. I didn't report _any_ speedup. I only reported >>the increase in >>raw NPS numbers. So the rest of your query simply makes no sense to me. This >>is not about >>parallel search efficiency. It is about whether SMT speeds things up or not, >>and the answer (so >>far) is clearly "yes it does." >> >>This is the last position from the 24 I ran. It is one of the Kopec positions >>but It >>doesn't say which one. The position is this (FEN): >>3rn2k/ppb2rpp/2ppqp2/5N2/2P1P3/1P5Q/PB3PPP/3RR1K1 w >> >>Run 1. one thread, no SMT: >>White(1): move >> clearing hash tables >> time surplus 0.00 time limit 166:39 (166:39) >> depth time score variation (1) >> 1 0.00 0.81 1. Bd4 >> 1-> 0.00 0.81 1. Bd4 >> 2 0.00 0.73 1. Bd4 Bb6 >> 2-> 0.00 0.73 1. Bd4 Bb6 >> 3 0.00 -- 1. Bd4 >> 3 0.00 0.29 1. Bd4 g6 2. Nh6 Qxh3 3. gxh3 >> 3 0.01 0.58 1. Nh6 Re7 2. Qxe6 Rxe6 >> 3 0.01 0.63 1. Qf3 g6 2. Nh6 >> 3-> 0.01 0.63 1. Qf3 g6 2. Nh6 >> 4 0.01 0.53 1. Qf3 g6 2. Nh6 Re7 >> 4 0.01 0.58 1. Nh6 Re7 2. Qxe6 Rxe6 >> 4-> 0.04 0.58 1. Nh6 Re7 2. Qxe6 Rxe6 >> 5 0.04 ++ 1. Nh6!! >> 5 0.05 2.19 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 5-> 0.06 2.19 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 6 0.06 2.40 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Bd4 >> 6-> 0.10 2.40 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Bd4 >> 7 0.11 2.32 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Bd4 Bb6 >> 7-> 0.16 2.32 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Bd4 Bb6 >> 8 0.20 2.31 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 b5 5. cxb5 cxb5 >> 8-> 0.33 2.31 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 b5 5. cxb5 cxb5 >> 9 0.37 2.34 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Ba5 5. Rg1 Ke6 >> 9-> 0.54 2.34 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Ba5 5. Rg1 Ke6 >> 10 0.61 2.41 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Ba5 5. Rg1 b5 6. cxb5 cxb5 >> 10-> 1.49 2.41 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Ba5 5. Rg1 b5 6. cxb5 cxb5 >> 11 1.62 2.37 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Bb6 5. Kf3 Nc7 6. Rg1 d5 7. >> cxd5 cxd5 >> 11-> 3.93 2.37 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Bb6 5. Kf3 Nc7 6. Rg1 d5 7. >> cxd5 cxd5 >> 12 4.22 2.46 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Rd7 5. Kf3 Re7 6. a4 Bb6 7. >> Rg1 >> 12-> 7.90 2.46 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Rd7 5. Kf3 Re7 6. a4 Bb6 7. >> Rg1 >> 13 8.84 2.34 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Bb6 5. Kf3 Nc7 6. Ba3 Ke7 7. >> Bb4 Ne6 >> 13-> 25.57 2.34 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Bb6 5. Kf3 Nc7 6. Ba3 Ke7 7. >> Bb4 Ne6 >> time=25.57 cpu=99% mat=0 n=31129467 fh=94% nps=1217k >> ext-> chk=917605 cap=59244 pp=3275 1rep=119119 mate=34241 >> predicted=0 nodes=31129467 evals=3804978 >> endgame tablebase-> probes done=0 successful=0 >> SMP-> split=0 stop=0 data=0/64 cpu=25.50 elap=25.57 >> >>Run 2: two threads, no SMT: >> >> depth time score variation (1) >>starting thread 1 >> 1 0.00 0.81 1. Bd4 >> 1-> 0.00 0.81 1. Bd4 >> 2 0.00 0.73 1. Bd4 Bb6 >> 2-> 0.00 0.73 1. Bd4 Bb6 >> 3 0.00 -- 1. Bd4 >> 3 0.00 0.29 1. Bd4 g6 2. Nh6 Qxh3 3. gxh3 >> 3 0.00 0.58 1. Nh6 Re7 2. Qxe6 Rxe6 >> 3 0.01 0.63 1. Qf3 g6 2. Nh6 >> 3-> 0.07 0.63 1. Qf3 g6 2. Nh6 >> 4 0.07 0.53 1. Qf3 g6 2. Nh6 Re7 >> 4 0.07 0.58 1. Nh6 Re7 2. Qxe6 Rxe6 >> 4-> 0.10 0.58 1. Nh6 Re7 2. Qxe6 Rxe6 >> 5 0.10 ++ 1. Nh6!! >> 5 0.11 2.19 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 5-> 0.14 2.19 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 6 0.15 2.40 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Bd4 >> 6-> 0.17 2.40 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Bd4 (s=4) >> 7 0.18 2.32 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Bd4 Bb6 (s=3) >> 7-> 0.35 2.32 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Bd4 Bb6 (s=6) >> 8 0.37 2.31 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 b5 5. cxb5 cxb5 (s=5) >> 8-> 0.50 2.31 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 b5 5. cxb5 cxb5 (s=4) >> 9 0.57 2.34 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Ba5 5. Rg1 Ke6 (s=3) >> 9-> 0.73 2.34 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Ba5 5. Rg1 Ke6 (s=5) >> 10 0.78 2.41 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Ba5 5. Rg1 b5 6. cxb5 cxb5 (s=4) >> 10-> 1.38 2.41 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Ba5 5. Rg1 b5 6. cxb5 cxb5 (s=8) >> 11 1.49 2.37 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Bb6 5. Kf3 Nc7 6. Rg1 d5 7. >> cxd5 cxd5 (s=7) >> 11-> 2.98 2.37 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Bb6 5. Kf3 Nc7 6. Rg1 d5 7. >> cxd5 cxd5 (s=10) >> 12 3.19 2.46 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Rd7 5. Kf3 Re7 6. a4 Bb6 7. >> Rg1 (s=9) >> 12-> 6.02 2.46 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Rd7 5. Kf3 Re7 6. a4 Bb6 7. >> Rg1 (s=9) >> 13 6.70 2.34 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Bb6 5. Kf3 Nc7 6. Ba3 Ke7 7. >> Bb4 Ne6 (s=8) >> 13-> 18.42 2.34 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Bb6 5. Kf3 Nc7 6. Ba3 Ke7 7. >> Bb4 Ne6 (s=12) >> time=18.42 cpu=188% mat=0 n=34809013 fh=94% nps=1889k >> ext-> chk=992883 cap=70671 pp=5213 1rep=135350 mate=27885 >> predicted=0 nodes=34809013 evals=4659923 >> endgame tablebase-> probes done=0 successful=0 >> SMP-> split=761 stop=38 data=7/64 cpu=34.74 elap=18.42 >> >>Run three: three threads, SMT _on_: >> >>White(1): move >> clearing hash tables >> time surplus 0.00 time limit 166:39 (166:39) >> depth time score variation (1) >>starting thread 1 >>starting thread 2 >> 1 0.00 0.81 1. Bd4 >> 1-> 0.01 0.81 1. Bd4 >> 2 0.01 0.73 1. Bd4 Bb6 >> 2-> 0.01 0.73 1. Bd4 Bb6 >> 3 0.01 -- 1. Bd4 >> 3 0.01 0.29 1. Bd4 g6 2. Nh6 Qxh3 3. gxh3 >> 3 0.01 0.58 1. Nh6 Re7 2. Qxe6 Rxe6 >> 3 0.02 0.63 1. Qf3 g6 2. Nh6 >> 3-> 0.08 0.63 1. Qf3 g6 2. Nh6 >> 4 0.08 0.53 1. Qf3 g6 2. Nh6 Re7 >> 4 0.09 0.58 1. Nh6 Re7 2. Qxe6 Rxe6 >> 4-> 0.10 0.58 1. Nh6 Re7 2. Qxe6 Rxe6 >> 5 0.11 ++ 1. Nh6!! >> 5 0.11 2.19 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 5-> 0.16 2.19 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 6 0.17 2.40 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Bd4 >> 6-> 0.19 2.40 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Bd4 (s=4) >> 7 0.20 2.32 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Bd4 Bb6 (s=3) >> 7-> 0.24 2.32 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Bd4 Bb6 (s=7) >> 8 0.26 2.31 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 b5 5. cxb5 cxb5 (s=6) >> 8-> 0.36 2.31 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 b5 5. cxb5 cxb5 (s=4) >> 9 0.38 2.34 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Ba5 5. Rg1 Ke6 (s=3) >> 9-> 0.50 2.34 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Ba5 5. Rg1 Ke6 (s=5) >> 10 0.54 2.41 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Ba5 5. Rg1 b5 6. cxb5 cxb5 (s=4) >> 10-> 1.07 2.41 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Ba5 5. Rg1 b5 6. cxb5 cxb5 (s=8) >> 11 1.16 2.37 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Bb6 5. Kf3 Nc7 6. Rg1 d5 7. >> cxd5 cxd5 (s=7) >> 11-> 2.66 2.37 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Bb6 5. Kf3 Nc7 6. Rg1 d5 7. >> cxd5 cxd5 (s=10) >> 12 2.86 2.46 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Rd7 5. Kf3 Re7 6. a4 Bb6 7. >> Rg1 (s=9) >> 12-> 5.40 2.46 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Rd7 5. Kf3 Re7 6. a4 Bb6 7. >> Rg1 (s=8) >> 13 6.02 2.34 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Bb6 5. Kf3 Nc7 6. Ba3 Ke7 7. >> Bb4 Ne6 (s=7) >> 13-> 17.69 2.34 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Bb6 5. Kf3 Nc7 6. Ba3 Ke7 7. >> Bb4 Ne6 (s=13) >> time=17.69 cpu=296% mat=0 n=38066840 fh=94% nps=2151k >> ext-> chk=1076447 cap=74646 pp=5437 1rep=149438 mate=35093 >> predicted=0 nodes=38066840 evals=5253700 >> endgame tablebase-> probes done=0 successful=0 >> SMP-> split=2994 stop=217 data=15/64 cpu=52.47 elap=17.69 >> >>Run four: four threads, SMT _on_: >> >>White(1): move >> clearing hash tables >> time surplus 0.00 time limit 166:39 (166:39) >> depth time score variation (1) >>starting thread 1 >>starting thread 2 >>starting thread 3 >> 1 0.00 0.81 1. Bd4 >> 1-> 0.03 0.81 1. Bd4 >> 2 0.06 0.73 1. Bd4 Bb6 >> 2-> 0.10 0.73 1. Bd4 Bb6 >> 3 0.10 -- 1. Bd4 >> 3 0.11 0.29 1. Bd4 g6 2. Nh6 Qxh3 3. gxh3 >> 3 0.11 0.58 1. Nh6 Re7 2. Qxe6 Rxe6 >> 3 0.11 0.63 1. Qf3 g6 2. Nh6 >> 3-> 0.14 0.63 1. Qf3 g6 2. Nh6 >> 4 0.14 0.53 1. Qf3 g6 2. Nh6 Re7 >> 4 0.14 0.58 1. Nh6 Re7 2. Qxe6 Rxe6 >> 4-> 0.15 0.58 1. Nh6 Re7 2. Qxe6 Rxe6 >> 5 0.16 ++ 1. Nh6!! >> 5 0.19 2.19 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 5-> 0.20 2.19 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 6 0.20 2.40 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Bd4 >> 6-> 0.28 2.40 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Bd4 (s=4) >> 7 0.35 2.32 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Bd4 Bb6 (s=3) >> 7-> 0.43 2.32 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Bd4 Bb6 (s=7) >> 8 0.45 2.31 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 b5 5. cxb5 cxb5 (s=6) >> 8-> 0.60 2.31 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 b5 5. cxb5 cxb5 (s=4) >> 9 0.65 2.34 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Ba5 5. Rg1 Ke6 (s=3) >> 9-> 0.76 2.34 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Ba5 5. Rg1 Ke6 (s=5) >> 10 0.83 2.41 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Ba5 5. Rg1 b5 6. cxb5 cxb5 (s=4) >> 10-> 1.36 2.41 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Ba5 5. Rg1 b5 6. cxb5 cxb5 (s=8) >> 11 1.46 2.37 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Bb6 5. Kf3 Nc7 6. Rg1 d5 7. >> cxd5 cxd5 (s=7) >> 11-> 3.06 2.37 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Bb6 5. Kf3 Nc7 6. Rg1 d5 7. >> cxd5 cxd5 (s=10) >> 12 3.27 2.46 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Rd7 5. Kf3 Re7 6. a4 Bb6 7. >> Rg1 (s=9) >> 12-> 5.66 2.46 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Rd7 5. Kf3 Re7 6. a4 Bb6 7. >> Rg1 (s=8) >> 13 6.34 2.34 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Bb6 5. Kf3 Nc7 6. Ba3 Ke7 7. >> Bb4 Ne6 (s=7) >> 13-> 16.09 2.34 1. Nh6 Qxh3 2. Nxf7+ Kg8 3. gxh3 Kxf7 >> 4. Kg2 Bb6 5. Kf3 Nc7 6. Ba3 Ke7 7. >> Bb4 Ne6 (s=13) >> time=16.09 cpu=377% mat=0 n=36609790 fh=94% nps=2275k >> ext-> chk=1035481 cap=72332 pp=4034 1rep=144147 mate=40133 >> predicted=0 nodes=36609790 evals=4935572 >> endgame tablebase-> probes done=0 successful=0 >> SMP-> split=5501 stop=394 data=16/64 cpu=1:00 elap=16.09 >> >> >> >> >>>>>>parallel search overhead, you have a problem on _normal_ SMP machines as well. >>>>> >>>>>Indeed it is true that the first seconds the HT/SMT gives big problems >>>>>in speed. Only after a couple of minutes the speed shows. I see only >>>>>a speedup after a minute or 3 each position. >>>> >>>>So? That is _your_ program's results. Mine are just like they have always >>>>been. I get a reasonable speedup whether it is one second per move or one >>>>hour per move. No difference. >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>I need to add however that i could improve a few issues in this version >>>>>which could get that down to 1 minute but like you i doubt whether the 11.4% >>>>>of HT is worth it. >>>> >>>>11.4% is _always_ worth it IMHO... >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>I prefer a dual AMD instead for the moment! >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>Nothing wrong with that. I got the dual xeon because I wanted a chance to play >>>>with the SMT stuff since it is obviously going to be "the future" of >>>>microprocessor >>>>architecture...
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.