Author: Matt Taylor
Date: 18:51:41 02/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 21, 2003 at 19:49:55, Aaron Gordon wrote: >On February 21, 2003 at 18:08:58, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On February 21, 2003 at 17:37:35, Aaron Gordon wrote: >> >>>On February 21, 2003 at 08:04:18, Mike Byrne wrote: >>> >>>>On February 21, 2003 at 08:02:34, Mike Byrne wrote: >>>> >>>>>On February 21, 2003 at 07:14:47, Charles Worthington wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On February 21, 2003 at 07:05:22, Charles Worthington wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On February 21, 2003 at 06:47:11, Mike Byrne wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On February 21, 2003 at 04:46:53, Charles Worthington wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Bob what program is required for me to conduct benchmark tests with Crafty? >>>>>>>>>Could you please e-mail it or post a link here to it? Thank you. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Charles, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>You have it, the "crafty" program has a built in benchmark ....start crafty in >>>>>>>>dos mode (console) with no crafty.rc file ( a plain taxt file you create with >>>>>>>>engine parameters - but in this case - do not have a crafty.rc file in the same >>>>>>>>directory as crafty). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Type word "bench" at the command prompt. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Mike >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Thanks Mike. I haven't set the Crafty you sent me up yet so I didn't know. In >>>>>>>all honesty I have no Idea how to set it up to run on the Chessbase server. The >>>>>>>Crafty that comes with fritz is already set up so I have never had to set one up >>>>>>>yet. The other foreign progs are easy just drop in the eng and dll and you are >>>>>>>done. This does not look so easy. :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>640 kNs.....Not good :-) >>>>> >>>>>on your new machine?? >>>> >>>>ok I see it in your title ...that is respectable for 1.2Ghz Celeron -- it's in >>>>the ballpark -- I think a dual 3 Ghz will get 3M nps.... >>> >>>Hyatts Dual xeon 2.8GHz only gets 2.1 million in the benchmark.. >>>If you scale it up to 3.06x2 + HT you'll only see about 2.3 million. >> >>I won't try to predict that performance, it needs testing. The 3.06 xeons >>have 533mhz FSB, while my 2.8s are 400. That is a difference above and beyond >>the raw clock speed. > >When I did testing vs Athlon SDR systems and DDR systems I noticed next to no >difference in Crafty's performance. Doubling bandwidth made less than a 2% >increase (if even that). Here is the graph I did back then, all "Thunderbird" >systems are SDR, all AthlonXP's are DDR. I also included 1GHz/100fsb Athlon >Tbird results vs 1GHz/133fsb results. Here is the list: > >http://speedycpu.dyndns.org/crafty/c1900-bench.jpg > >So you can compare: AthlonXP 1600+'s are 1.4GHz, compare with Tbird 1.4GHz. >AthlonXP 1500+'s are 1.33GHz, compare with the Tbird 1.33. > >>>Crafty v19.4 (1 cpus) >>> >>>White(1): mt=4 >>>max threads set to 4 >>>White(1): bench >>>Running benchmark. . . >>>...... >>>Total nodes: 104415743 >>>Raw nodes per second: 2130933 >>>Total elapsed time: 49 >>>SMP time-to-ply measurement: 13.061224 >>>White(1): end A faster FSB does more than just add bandwidth. CL=2 ram on a 100 MHz FSB is slower latency-wise than CL=2 ram on a 133 MHz FSB. The ram timings in your results aren't posted, but I would bet that they are different in some cases. This can make a world of difference, particularly since the processors burn off a lot of precious cycles waiting on memory. -Matt
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.