Author: Peter Stayne
Date: 05:15:58 06/29/03
Go up one level in this thread
Actually Aaron and I recently had a very lengthy discussion about that last week. My dual 3.06's are certainly faster than a dual 2133MHz, and probably a tad slower than Aaron's overclocked babies. If you don't mind overclocked (I've had many overclocked boxes in the past), go with Aaron's machines. If you'd feel safer with stock speeds, the Xeons are faster (the 533MHz ones anyways). See this page for more info: http://www.beepworld.de/members38/lchristian/cpu-chess.htm Pete On June 29, 2003 at 06:18:08, Joachim Rang wrote: >On June 29, 2003 at 05:56:38, emerson tan wrote: > >>what is faster for chess, dual 2.8 Ghz xeon or dual athlon mp 2.800+? >> >>John nunn chose xeon when he upgraded his computer, I thought amd is usually >>fater for chess. Does anyone have a fritzmark comparing these two systems? >>thanks > >Aaron posted some results with Atholon MPs recently. He sells overclocked but >tested MP-Chips very cheap. > >From all posts I know the Xeons give 70% Chessperformance compared to Athlons at >the same speed. So: > >Xeon 2,8 GHz equal Athlon@1,96 Ghz > >An MP2800+ has 2,133 Ghz = 3,05 Ghz Xeon or P4-Performacne. > >I would suggest to buy a Dual Athlon MP 2600+ since the 2600+ has the same Mhz >and only a lesser L2-Cache. For chess a L2-Cache does not matter much, so an >MP2600+ will be as fast as a MP2800+ (but cheaper). > >regards Joachim
This page took 0.01 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.