Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 14:10:46 09/08/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 08, 2003 at 16:15:06, Matthew Hull wrote: >On September 08, 2003 at 15:06:31, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On September 08, 2003 at 14:53:57, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On September 08, 2003 at 14:30:41, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On September 07, 2003 at 14:37:17, Joost Buijs wrote: >>>> >>>>diep is getting tested on the 248 right now by Johan de Gelas. both amd64 and >>>>quad opteron. >>>> >>>>www.aceshardware.com >>>> >>>>regrettably only they want to test 32 bits mode... ...but well diep is NUMA. I >>>>have shipped a NUMA version of diep to them that can go up to 4 cpu's. So that's >>>>interesting to see how it does. Johan is very good in testing. also he does not >>>>cheat. >>>> >>>>some other sites that tested diep in the past cheated. when the production >>>>version of those machines was released and i tested with same executable, it >>>>appeared that intel had cheated by 5% in speed. >>>> >>>>Also the speedup from SMT they had with diep was higher than when some others >>>>who had purchased dual Xeons, could not get to. >>>> >>>>www.aceshardware.com doesn't do that. Johan is a very objective testers. >>>> >>>>His main intention is to figure out how much the added branch prediction table >>>>will do for DIEP. >>>> >>>>P3 has 512 entries BTB (branch target buffer) >>>>K7 has 2048 entries BPT (branch prediction table) >>>>opteron/amd64 has 16384. >>>> >>>>Intel runs behind for complex software. >>> >>>That is irrelevant (the size). The Intel BTB is _far_ better than >>>that on any of the other processors you mentioned. >>> >>>I'll let you do the research to find out why the new Intel branch >>>prediction is better. Hint: It detects patterns and predicts based >>>on the pattern of past taken/not-taken cases. It's clever. >>> >>>If bigger were always better, 2M of direct-mapped cache would be better >>>than 512K of 16-way set associative. It isn't. >>> >>>Quality still counts... >> >>You are wrong in one respect. You underestimate how advanced the AMD prediction >>works. >> >>The K7 branch prediction of 2048 entries was using the alpha 21264 way of >>predicting. >> >>That is *very* advanced. >> >>For complex software when both are very advanced, more is better of course. >> >>First of all branch prediction of opteron works better. Secondly it's like 16384 >>entries. I forgot how big the P4's is. Probably also quite bigger than the poor >>512 entries they have put in the P3. >> >>But still Opteron outguns everything at *all* fronts >> - 64 bits, p4 and k7 are all 32 bits cpu's >> - 16 GPR registers, only cpu's like itanium from $8000 a piece have more > > >POWER4+. Macs have POWER4 based chips that don't cost that much, plus a Vector >processor. Ignore his numbers. IE the Sparc 64 has 32 addressable registers at any instant in time, with a 500+ register pool to make procedure calls and saving/restoring registers zero-cost. > > >> - highest clocked RISC cpu >> - bigger branch prediction table than any cpu i know >> - BIGGER LEVEL 1 CACHE, even than itanium which has a poor 32KB. >> - shorter stage than P4, so smaller branch mispredicton penalty >> - capable of getting a high IPC and even at floating point it can >> effectively retire 1 multiplication a clock (without cheating). >> >>And very important: you can buy it NOW. > >Buy a Mac now too. Buy a POWER4+ workstation NOW too. > >MH Been able to buy a sparc 64 for several years. Not that anybody would want to. > >> >>> >>>> >>>>Best regards, >>>>Vincent >>>> >>>> >>>>>On September 07, 2003 at 11:43:26, Michael P. Nance Sr. wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On September 07, 2003 at 11:31:30, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On September 07, 2003 at 10:54:47, Michael P. Nance Sr. wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>If I may,how can I get that version of WS 2003 (64 bit) so I can run Deep Sjeng >>>>>>>>on My dual (246) Operton also? I'm at a Crossroads now, on what OS to use with >>>>>>>>My Operton. I want to be able to go 64 bit.I wouldn't be able to accomplish >that with Windows XP Pro. Please fill in the gaps for Me.>>>>Mike >>>>>>> >>>>>>>You cannot get it. According to other posters here, there's a beta, but >>>>>>>I don't think it is available to members of the general public. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>The only way to run 64 bit programs on the Opteron right now is to >>>>>>>use Linux. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>-- >>>>>>>GCP >>>>>> >>>>>>When might a commerical version of WS 2003(64 bit) be available to be purchased >>>>>>by Us Peons? I don't suppose that there is some kind of a restriction on using >>>>>>Linus with My Opteron or is that a dead Horse also? If so,what would be the cost >>>>>>compairson comparired to WS 2003,would It work?>>>>Mike >>>>> >>>>>It will take a few months before a 64 bit AMD version of windows will hit the >>>>>streets. There seems to be a beta version of windows XP for AMD-64 to. >>>>>GamePC already did a preview. >>>>>http://www.gamepc.com/labs/view_content.asp?id=amd64xp&page=1 >>>>>Probably it is worth while to wait somewhat longer, AMD will release the 2200 >>>>>MHz. 248 Opteron very soon according to the inquirer. >>>>>http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=11371 >>>>>This will be a real beast!
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.