Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 08:00:36 01/01/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 01, 2003 at 05:23:57, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >On January 01, 2003 at 01:58:01, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>Itanium2 blows the 21264 away for me. It's just that crafty cannot >>profit too much from the next major advantage McKinley offers offers >>over the 21264 for IPC: >> >>Look to this table: >> >>McKinley 6 instructions a cycle (bundles) >>Alpha 4 instructions a cycle > >If you're going to post such simplistic tables, without much understanding of >the data contained in them, here is a 'table' for you: > >McKinley - strictly in-order execution >Alpha - out-of-order execution > >Make of it what you will. Read other postings from Bob. He's just talking about that if you know how the vector machines (like the 1Ghz Cray) work that you can program for it very well. Yet crafty doesn't profit from exactly that with the McKinley, which is weird IMHO. Potentially it's 50% faster for him. He is the one who claims he knows how to write for it.
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.