Author: Charles Worthington
Date: 12:35:37 02/18/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 18, 2003 at 15:27:55, Drexel,Michael wrote: >On February 18, 2003 at 14:44:10, Charles Worthington wrote: > >>Actually the 3175 kNs was derived at from a mathmatical formula: 1200 kNs for >>single 3.06 cpu times 1.85 (For Duals) then that figure times 1.33 for >>hyperthreading. Until I have the system in hand to test it the math is all i >>have to go by. Why hasnt anyone tested the dual 2.8 Xeons by now? They have >>certainly been on the market long enough that someone here would have tested >>them other than Bob. > >Unfortunately Bob dont like to install Fritz 7 or Fritz 8. I assume he only >would have to send chessbase a mail and they would ship him all products for >free. >He is probably Winboard-Crafty Fan :) >CC enthusiasts in Germany generally prefer Dual AMD systems. So do I I can't say which system I prefer yet. I will soon have both in hand then I will conduct unbiased tests. The germans prefer AMD because they don't run the new Xeons. The price in Germany is a major factor. Price-wise I prefer the AMD as well but i was not looking for the best value i was looking for the best performance with cost not an object. All I am saying is that the AMD users have not actually owned a newer Xeon system so when they quote performance specs they have no idea what they are talking about. My Xeon system i ordered from Dell is the very first one ordered in the 3.06 platform with the new E7505 Chipset. No one can claim to know that the AMD is faster than this box until we see for sure by testing them. What will they say if the Xeon turns out to be significantly faster?
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.