Author: Pavel Blokhine
Date: 22:42:22 04/21/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 21, 2003 at 18:58:08, Charles Worthington wrote: >On April 20, 2003 at 10:06:01, Vincent Lejeune wrote: > >>On April 19, 2003 at 08:19:55, Vincent Lejeune wrote: >> >>>one more link, 11 pages, very slow server : >>> >>>http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/athlon64.html >> >>caution, may be this was a beta hardware : >>http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=9046 >> >> >>> >>>On April 19, 2003 at 07:46:47, Vincent Lejeune wrote: >>> >>>>No bad news this time, the opteron systems will be out the 21st of april !! >>>> >>>>http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=9039 >>>>http://www.amdzone.com/ >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>On April 19, 2003 at 01:02:15, Pavel Blokhine wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 18, 2003 at 23:37:04, Brian Richardson wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On April 18, 2003 at 21:58:06, Jonas Bylund wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>>Thanks. But so far, nobody has told me if it was a faster machine than the dual >>>>>>>>Xeon 2.8Ghz...which was the thing i wanted to know. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Yes dual AMD 2600+ would be faster. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Jonas >>>>>> > > >Dual AMD 2600MP 64MB Hash Deepfritzmark Test Position = 2,053kN/s >Dual 2.8 Xeon 64MB Hash Deepfritzmark Test Position = 2,209kN/s > >So...no it isn't faster... Hmmm, that's very confusing because Aaron Gordon and Jonas said it would be faster and you come up with these numbers. I don't know who should i believe. According to Aaron Gordon, the Dual AMD 2600 is not too far from being as fast as the dual Xeon 3.06.
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.