Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 13:19:48 02/19/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 19, 2003 at 14:17:55, Steffen Basting wrote: >Hi! >I've posted some benchmark results on my PIV 3.06 earlier and your 1.33 factor >in speed up seems to be a little too optimistic. Crafty benefits most from >hyperthreading (about 20%), the usual nodes per second increase (Deep Shredder 6 >and Deep Fritz 7) is about 10% at maximum. Perhaps Xeons perform better, but I >don't think the hyperthreading performance differs too much. > >----- Crafty, 1 Thread ----- >White(1): hash 96M >hash table memory = 96M bytes. >White(1): smpmt=0 >parallel threads disabled. >White(1): bench >Running benchmark. . . >...... >Total nodes: 48447803 >Raw nodes per second: 1211195 >Total elapsed time: 40 >SMP time-to-ply measurement: 16.000000 > >----- Crafty, 2 Threads ----- >White(1): hash 96M >hash table memory = 96M bytes. >White(1): smpmt=2 >max threads set to 2 >White(1): bench >Running benchmark. . . >...... >Total nodes: 48586305 >Raw nodes per second: 1429008 >Total elapsed time: 34 >SMP time-to-ply measurement: 18.823529 > >----- Shredder 6-Mark, 1 Thread ----- >655+-44, 490kn/s > >----- Shredder 6-Mark, 2 Threads ----- >696+-45, 502kn/s > >----- Deep Fritz 7-Mark, 1 Thread ----- >1433+-0, 1193kn/s > >----- Deep Fritz 7-Mark, 2 Threads ----- >1602+-0, 1352kn/s > >Regards, Steffen. > >PS: The Crafty version I used was 18.6-smp from Bob's site, perhaps newer >versions are optimized for hyperthreading? Newer versions have a better spinlock and spinwait, but the difference it not really significant...
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.