Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Hyperthreading vs. dual configuration performance? Somewhat OT

Author: P. Massie

Date: 19:07:12 02/20/03

Go up one level in this thread


On February 20, 2003 at 20:06:01, Robert Pawlak wrote:

>Hi Everyone,
>
>I am on the verge of buying a new computer at work. However, I do quite a bit of
>heavy computation, and have a need to run modeling jobs that take days to
>complete. My current system gets a bit sluggish when I do this, and so I have
>been thinking about one of the following:
>
>Dual Xeon
>Dual Athlon MP
>3 GHz P4 with HT
>OS: WinXP
>
>The software I run in the background is very integer intensive. The are times
>also when I run floating point intensive stuff as well. And of course, the
>models consume gobs of memory. So you see the similarities to your typical chess
>engine with large hash (at least for integer stuff).
>
>The application I am using will only run in a single thread. My concern is not
>so much about MIPS, but about whether the machine is still usable while my jobs
>are running in the background.
>
>Base on my limited understanding of hyperthreading, it looks like it might be an
>ok alternative. But I have no idea how well it will perform for my needs. I
>included it because it has the potential to be the best performer. The dual Xeon
>seems interesting to me as well, since it would give me four logical processors
>:-). I also think Intel might be my better choice because of the larger memory
>bandwidth.
>
>Does anyone have any practical experience they'd like to share on this topic?
>
>Thanks,
>Bob

I have a dual Xeon (2 Ghz) running Win 2000.  My machine is more than a year
old, so well before HT was available.  I frequently use it for an application
similar to yours, where I have something running in the background that
completely ties up one processor and a large chunk of memory.  I can still use
the machine quite normally for other jobs - there's no discernible slowdown,
either visually or through benchmarking while this is going on.

The caveats here are that the background job can't be doing any I/O, and it has
to leave a reasonable amount of memory available for your foreground jobs.
Given that is the case, my experience with a dual Xeon is that it works
beautifully for this.  You're still sharing a single I/O and memory system, so
if the background job starts doing I/O at the same time as the foreground job,
or if it takes too much memory you'll still have an overall slowdown.

I'm not an expert on HT, but based on what I've read about it, and what I know
about how computers work I suspect it will be somewhat better than a "normal"
processor for this, but not nearly as good as a true dual.  My suggestion would
be a dual AMD or Xeon.

Paul



This page took 0.01 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.