Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:48:02 05/26/03
Go up one level in this thread
On May 24, 2003 at 20:08:40, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On May 24, 2003 at 17:50:00, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>If you would listen, you would learn a _lot_ from most everyone here. >> >>However, until you learn how much you _don't_ know, your education won't >>proceed... > >Wow, that stern talking-to would have made me reconsider my position, except >that everything I've been saying (and you've been contradicting) is backed up by >Intel itself: > >http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?297879 > >-Tom Here's a refresher. What is the _latency_ on your computer? A few weeks ago you claimed 75ns, which I claimed was ridiculous. I told you how to measure it. You never responded after that. I'm sure you noticed that _everybody_ reported 125-150ns latency except for one wildly overclocked machine... The above link doesn't exactly lead to a "no details omitted type description" as I said earlier. Your explanation about "50-50 unless one processor is idle" also was a bit off the mark for any O/S I know of...
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.