Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 12:29:05 05/26/03
Go up one level in this thread
On May 26, 2003 at 13:48:02, Robert Hyatt wrote: >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... Yes, well, obviously I used a bad tool to measure it. You're not in a position to turn this into a "you're ignorant because you made a mistake" thing, Professor HALTt. >Your explanation about "50-50 unless one processor is idle" also was a bit >off the mark for any O/S I know of... Sure, Professor Haltt. "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..." -Tom
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.