Author: Michael P. Nance Sr.
Date: 11:32:47 06/29/03
Go up one level in this thread
On June 29, 2003 at 09:31:41, Joachim Rang wrote: >On June 29, 2003 at 08:15:58, Peter Stayne wrote: > >>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 > > >Hi, > >I was referring to this thread which mentioned you above. If I calculated >correctly a 3.06 GHz - Xeon will be like a 2146 MHz Athlon (according to the >formula P4GHz*0.7=Athlon GHz) so slightly faster than an MP2800+ or 2600+. >Perhaps in the DUAL-Configuration the Xeons gain another few percents so a Dual >Xeon 3,06 will be faster than a Dual Athlon MP2800+ at 2.133 GHz. But a >Dual-Xeon 2.8 GHz will be probably a bit slower than a DUAL-Athlon MP@2.133 GHz. >Right? In either case the differences will be little. > >Of course different programs gain differently from the Dualconfiguration. I >remember a post where Aaron showed, that Junior 8 gains the same speedup on >Xeons and Athlons, while Shredder 7 gains a bit more on Xeons but I might >remember wrong. > >regards Joachim Hello, If I may add My 2 percent. Naturally this Fellow is Cheerleading for Pentuim because He has a pair of Xeons. In all Your time and experience, You've spent with Chess Programming with different Boxes,haven't You had better results with AMD rather than with Pentuim? I will however agree on His point of sticking to stock speed ,and steer clear of an "OVERCLOCKED" Box. The key issue of reliablity come to mind when considering an overclocked Box. With all that said,AMD is soon to release Thier lastest version of the Opteron chip(2 Ghz), in Dual configuration should have everthing else beat. Also Athlon will be releasing Thier new 64 bit technology soon. Oh well I've always followed My "gut" feeling, and It's always done Me right. Could It be behooving to wait a bit more before One invests in a new Box? I do believe thow ,that the Chess Programming World is going to grow leaps and bounds in the next couple of Years. It does appear that a Multi-Processor is the future of Chess Programmming. Oh well ,let Me get off My Soapbox now. Think about It.>>>>Mike
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.