Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 14:19:29 09/19/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 18, 2003 at 18:32:23, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On September 18, 2003 at 11:06:13, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On September 18, 2003 at 03:50:11, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >> >>>On September 17, 2003 at 16:03:09, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On September 17, 2003 at 14:54:41, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>> >>>>>On September 17, 2003 at 14:47:49, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>lower clocked opterons are like $300, so i am pretty sure there is a big demand >>>>>already. >>>> >>>>No there isn't, because for single and dual machines, the NUMA issue can >>>>pretty well be ignored >>> >>>Ignored? You _will_ get a performance handicap if you do so. >>> >>>-- >>>GCP >> >>Yes, but on a dual it is a _minimal_ handicap. > >Last week, this 'minimal' handicap was enough to require a special >version of Crafty. Now it's not needed for the Linux kernel? Uhh... > >-- >GCP You are hanging around Vincent too much. I said two things: NUMA for a dual is not a _big_ issue. Running crafty on a NUMA dual needs some work to make it optimal. _neither_ of those statements is contradictory with the other. Crafty _will_ run on a dual NUMA. It won't run optimally. How much will it lose? I don't know. But not _nearly_ as much as it loses on a bigger NUMA box. Is this _really_ that hard to follow???
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.