Author: Charles Worthington
Date: 22:26:09 04/07/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 08, 2003 at 01:19:09, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On April 08, 2003 at 01:15:20, Charles Worthington wrote: > >>On April 08, 2003 at 01:12:06, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>what i don't understand is that i test at production machines >>>and speed is clearly in favour for the K7 in diep's case. >>> >>>frans morsch, creator of fritz, whom i regurarly email with finds the K7 also >>>hell of a processor. he's looking forward to the prescott though but that will >>>be 2004+. >>> >>>i'm looking forward to the itanic of AMD called Hammer but if they delay it >>>until 2004 it is not anymore a hammer but more like a slow pencil. >>> >>>if it's released tomorrow then that will kick butt of course. >>> >>>basically hardware speed for DUALS is very clear. >>> >>>K7 XP wins there. 2 times CHEAPER. and a bit faster too. >>> >>>secondly. >>> >>>with regard to quad and 8 processor boxes. We speak then about $100k machines. >>>starting at like $20k for the quads. >>> >>>there of course the 4 processor opteron will blow away everything. opteron gets >>>released within a few weeks. so if you want to make a bit of money. buy some AMD >>>stocks within a week (right after bagdad is under 'control') and sell them 2 >>>weeks after they revealed quad opteron boxes. >>> >>>The Quad opteron is on my "to buy" list so I will know soon enough what she will do :-) >>Charles > >you have $10k left for a quad opteron box? > >i would be amazed if it is in that price range btw. a quad beating all high end >servers by a big margin, including quad itaniums. note dual itanium2 1Ghz sells >for $67k so a quad opteron is a real buy if it is just $10k. > >some expect $7k for a 8 processor opteron. But i want to put that away as >dreamland. $10k for a 4 processor opteron already sounds very cheap to me. > >no competition on whole earth for it assuming 1.8Ghz opterons or above that. > >> >>Well i have 18,900 in this dual xeon box so in for a penny in for a pound i guess. If i can get the opteron for less than 15K i will consider it a bargain. and another nice tax write off Charles >>> >>>On April 08, 2003 at 01:03:21, Charles Worthington wrote: >>> >>>>On April 08, 2003 at 00:59:57, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 08, 2003 at 00:55:43, Charles Worthington wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On April 08, 2003 at 00:36:12, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On April 07, 2003 at 18:44:30, Charles Worthington wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On April 07, 2003 at 18:36:11, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Everyone already knows the Athlon is a numerical powerhouse and the Xeon was >>>>>>>>>designed to demux HDTV streams for my grandmother, so there is really no need to >>>>>>>>>'show you the speed'. If you just can't understand the obvious, you should >>>>>>>>>build yourself a *real* computer. Technology moves fast, and you are already >>>>>>>>>being left behind. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>anthony >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Perhaps, but that is still talk...I just want someone to come to the server and >>>>>>>>enlighten us all as to the error of our ways but it seems that no one is willing >>>>>>>>to come show us a real machine. Why could that be do you think? Could it be >>>>>>>>because you know you cannot post a faster speed? I can show you deep fritz 7 >>>>>>>>screenshots as high as 5777kN/s in endgames with 2500-2900kN/s averages in >>>>>>>>midgames. Lets both run a deepfritzmark and post the result here to compare. >>>>>>>>That is a relatively simple way to show me what a real machine can do. I think >>>>>>>>that is a reasonable request. I just want to see which machine I should be >>>>>>>>playing chess with... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>At world champs 2002 chessbase showed up with AMD hardware. Guess why. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Other champs they take what the sponsor gives them. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I want to bet that the prescott is not released end of 2003. means that they >>>>>>>will show up with dual AMD, because you can't clock the Xeon higher in 0.13 than >>>>>>>it is now (3.06Ghz is limit simply as it consumes 105 watt there). Period. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>So the K7 which still can get clocked higher still than it is now till it also >>>>>>>consumes around 100 watts, will get faster and faster till that time. It's >>>>>>>already faster now. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>It's a matter of what the sponsor gives simply! >>>>>> >>>>>>Actually Matthias Feist Used his own Dual 2.8 Xeon for fritz at the latest >>>>>>padderborn tournament. Call him on the phone and ask him why he did so....I did. >>>>>>He did not use a machine supplied by a sponsor. he used his own personal >>>>>>machine....and won the tournament. >>>>>> >>>>>>Charles >>>>> >>>>>Actually i played df7 there for like 6 hours. regrettably it came away with a >>>>>draw against DIEP (yet again). diep managed to conquer a pawn after quite a >>>>>while but to no avail. >>>>> >>>>>i asked him why he didn't run on a dual K7. >>>>> >>>>>answer: "sponsor gave this machine" >>>>> >>>>>i aske dhim whether he had tested whether 2 threads with SMT turned off were >>>>>giving bigger search depth than 4 threads with SMT turned on. He told me he >>>>>hadn't tested it at all. That's why he used 4 threads. >>>>> >>>>>That's why stefan who had tested it, played with SMT turned off and played dual >>>>>Xeon 2.8. >>>>> >>>>>if you have a sponsor like they have, you always go for the machine the sponsor >>>>>provide. the alternative is buying a dual K7, and that's quite a bit more >>>>>expensive than using that provided machine... >>>>> >>>>>I got home. quoted for first position out of book fritz had against me what >>>>>speed it there had and some people who sometimes post here too, had a much >>>>>faster fritz at their dual K7. >>>>> >>>>>Best regards, >>>>>Vincent >>>> >>>>A friend and i just took dual screenshots on the chessbase server she is in the >>>>process of posting them here....Look at those and please show me a faster nP/s >>>>screenshot from the dual k7.... >>>>Charles
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.