Author: Charles Worthington
Date: 02:30:10 02/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 20, 2003 at 15:02:12, Matt Taylor wrote: >On February 20, 2003 at 08:18:08, Andrew R. Case wrote: > >>On February 20, 2003 at 00:04:43, Matt Taylor wrote: >> >>>On February 19, 2003 at 21:43:10, Charles Worthington wrote: >>> >>>>On February 19, 2003 at 20:59:19, Charles Worthington wrote: >>>> >>>>>On February 19, 2003 at 20:58:20, Charles Worthington wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Yes Matt many people here do exagerate their figures. If the Intel guy says >>>>>>Intel will produce a 20 GHz cpu next week then the AMD guy will tell you that he >>>>>>can still clock his 2600 to 20.1GHz....and vice versa. The truth is that they >>>>>>are both good processors. Is the AMD on par with the Xeon in quality or speed? >>>>>>No, it isn't. The 2.8 Xeon was tested alongside the AMD 2400MP and clearly >>>>>>out-scored it. The tests were performed by an independant company who had no >>>>>>reason to lie. Yes as far as speed goes they can both be clocked up. But people >>>>>>should try to bear in mind that the AMD and the Xeon are very different products >>>>>>designed for very different markets. The Zeon is primarily designed for >>>>>>workstation and server platforms where both speed ans stability are required. >>>>>>They are high end processors and are priced accordingly. The Athlon is designed >>>>>>more for use in PC's both single cpu (xp) and dual (Mp). It is a fast processor >>>>>>for the buck but was not designed to be overclocked to try to match a Xeon. If a >>>>>>2 GHz cpu was stable at 3 GHz then, trust me, AMD would market it as a 3 GHz. >>>>>>The bottom line is simple: If you want performance and stability and you can >>>>>>afford to pay for it buy the Xeon. If you want performance but are on a limited >>>>>>budget buy the AMD. But_don't_ go out and buy a Yugo and then come back here and >>>>>>tell me that you are building it to catch the neighbors Ferrari. If the >>>>>>neighbors Ferrari bothers you that much then buy one too. If you can't afford >>>>>>one then be happy with the yugo. It will still get you where you are going. >>>>>> To me trying to compare Intel and AMD is like comparing apples and oranges. >>>>>>You are comparing a low end home and light business processor against a high end >>>>>>heavy duty cpu designed specifically for Workstation and server platforms. That >>>>>>is like comparing a Yugo to a Ferrari. >>>> >>>>Charles >>>> >>>> >>>>P.S. The figures for Deep Fritz 7 that I have observed on the chessbase server >>>>are as follows: 2.2GHz P4 750kNs; 2.8GHz P4 1038 kNs; 3.06GHz P4 w/HT 1,297kNs. >>>>AMD 2400xp 1030 kNs; Dual AMD 2400mp 2280kNs; Dual AMD 2400xp 2166 kNs. I have >>>>played against or observed most every dual on that site. I did see one machine >>>>post 2400 kNs but that was only once and may have been during a spike. I am >>>>unsure of the type cpu which produced that figure. I have seen overclocking >>>>claims here so wild as to defy belief. I have seen claims of single cpu AMD's >>>>pulling 1,800 kNs with Deep Fritz 7 (without any way of hyperthreading). They >>>>need to put that in a dual then come to the chessbase server and let us all see >>>>the 3300 kNs post. Of course they won't do this because they cant make that >>>>post. It is easy to post figures on here where no one can prove or disprove them >>>>but it's not so easy to prove it over the board on the chessbase server. The >>>>figures i have posted above were with 64 MB Hash tables in 3+2 time controls. >>>>And yes, some of those AMD dual machines are overclocked the owners have told me >>>>so themselves. The above figures are how it is in the real world. They are >>>>unbiased and accurate. And i challenge any AMD here overclocked or not to show >>>>all of us on the fritz server than he can exceed 2600 kNs with Deep Fritz 7. >>>>Forget posting the benchmarks here...let the chessbase server do that. And be >>>>sure to use the Deep Fritz 7 GUI and send evaluations. The kNs will be posted at >>>>the end of every game. >>> >>>AthlonMP 2600 is available. Comparing AthlonMP 2400 to P4 3.06 GHz isn't exactly >>>fair, is it? >>> >>>-Matt >> >> Sure it is, nobody has a dual 2600MP yet....that is the problem > >Nobody has a dual 3.06 either. I have not seen the 3.06 sold yet, though I >suppose Dell has them. I can order an MP 2600 right now if I want to. > >-Matt Matt, I have ordered the dual 3.06 system from Dell. Production was delayed a few days (evidently Dell was selling the system before they had all the parts in stock) but I am told that the machine is now in production. With next day shipping I should have the machine one day next week and will begin testing with fritz and crafty. I will post the benchmark results here. I have no idea what to expect with crafty but i have calculated that the results with df7 should be in the 2550 to 2650 kNs range based on the performance of the 3.06 P4. I suppose that a small boost from the P4 figures is possible with a workstation board but I can't be sure.
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.