Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 09:05:08 02/22/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 22, 2003 at 11:38:04, Uri Blass wrote: >On February 22, 2003 at 11:05:42, Charles Worthington wrote: > >>On February 22, 2003 at 07:08:53, Robert Pawlak wrote: >> >>>Charles, >>> >>>I am envious, please let us know how you enjoy your new system... >>> >>>Bob >> >>It's nothing to envy, Bob. It was a necessity for my business. I have never >>spent quite_that_much on a machine for my office before. A single 3.06 would >>have done fine for me also but considering that I use it for chess I opted for >>the dual. Rich, I am not, and it certainly stings a little to pay that price for >>a motherboard that I will have to abandon when Intel changes the design on their >>cpus. :-) > >I think that for most people there is no special reason to have a dual for >chess. > >I do not see why is it so important to have the fastest hardware and for a lot >of programs Dual is not faster than single. Maybe not faster, but things run more smoothly on a dual. Having a spare processor to handle the background processes when one chip is at full load is something you can definitely feel as a user. And maybe duals would be more popular if more software supported it, goes hand in hand I think. If only C/C++ had some support for it natively, so you could split at a lower level rather than spawning large threads all the time. Fortran is great here, simple vector operations can be done in parallel. >I do not see a reason to use top programs that you did not write for playing on >a chess server. I don't see the fun in that either. >Another idea may be trying to win the correspondence championship but in this >case I suspect that buying a lot of computers with single processor when every >computer analyze one game may be cheaper and more effective. > >Another idea for correspondence tournaments may be to have a team of 1000 people >who use computers and have rules what positions to analyze(it is possible that >one of them will generate a tree by analysis of chess programs and every player >is going to analysis one position in the tree for many hours when the choice of >the move will be based on all of the scores). > >Uri I think multiprocessor programs are interesting, increases the potential of the program. Imagine running Movei at 100 times the normal speed, wouldn't that be a kick? ;) -S.
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.