Author: Aaron Gordon
Date: 06:23:42 05/25/03
Go up one level in this thread
On May 24, 2003 at 16:53:57, Matthew White wrote: >On May 23, 2003 at 23:40:23, Aaron Gordon wrote: > >>>What are they measuring? >>> >>>IE running two copies _should_ see each copy run about 1/2 as fast with SMT >>>on, since each copy is getting roughly 50% of available cpu core resources >>>when running the same instruction streams. >>> >>>Or do you mean something else? >> >>It's keys per second for RC5, nodes per second for OGR. What I mean is it spawns >>1 thread per processor (or virtual processor in HT's case). >>My Dual Celeron 400MHz box gets an exact 2.00x speedup with this, I'm assuming >>because it doesn't hit the main memory at all. Any other dual processor system >>should also get a 2.00x speedup as well.. however I saw some results that were >>puzzling. Here they are... >> >>Dual Xeon (P4) 2.0GHz without HT - 2.8 million keys/sec per thread (5.6mk/s >>total), 2 threads total. >> >>Dual Xeon (P4) 2.0GHz with HT enabled - 0.72 million keys/sec per thread >>(2.88mk/s total), 4 threads total. >> >>I was just wondering if you could run the same tests and confirm this. I would >>have figured RC5/OGR would have managed a nice boost from HT, so it's surprising >>to me. >I have seen similarly poor performance on my Dual Xeon 2.4 GHz with HT enabled. >I manually configured the client to only spawn 2 threads. > >Matt Did you try OGR too or did you only experience the extreme slowdown with HT enabled only with RC5? If OGR was affected in any way, what was the speed increase/decrease? Thanks
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.