Author: Aaron Gordon
Date: 10:13:42 02/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 10, 2003 at 10:49:48, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >On February 10, 2003 at 10:45:02, Patrick Götz wrote: > >>For chess is a Athlon with more MHz better than a Athlon with more cache. >>So i would say that the chessperformance from XP 2700+ is as good as XP 3000+. > >How do you know this? Since there are no SPEC submissions yet for Barton CPUs, >and none of the hardware sites have anything resembling chess programs in their >benchmark suites, it's a completely unfounded assumption. Well, actually he made a pretty good guess. In tests I've found that faster cpus actually aren't affected much at all by L2 cache size. Older cpus like the Pentium 200, K6-200, etc are affected by the L2 on the motherboard. 486's are affected by L1 cache (486DX4 w/ 8k vs 5x86 w/ 16k for example, almost a 100% boost). When you get up into the ~500MHz+ systems I see no difference. Celeron & P3's score the same, Duron & Tbirds score the same, Willamette & Northwoods, etc are the same for chess.. Here's my current list of Crafty benchmarks: http://speedycpu.dyndns.org/crafty/bench.html
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.