Author: J. Wesley Cleveland
Date: 10:07:25 11/07/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 06, 2003 at 15:55:10, Russell Reagan wrote: >In this thread: > >http://www.chess-archive.com/ccc.php?art_id=310212 > >Gian-Carlo Pascutto reported that his program, Deep Sjeng (compiled for 64-bit >hardware), ran 70% faster on an Opteron, clock for clock. As far as I know, Deep >Sjeng is not bitboard based. > >In this thread: > >http://www.talkchess.com/forums/1/message.html?325912 > >Eugene Nalimov reports that Crafy (compiled for 64-bit hardware) gets 1,761,569 >nps on a 1.8GHz Opteron. On my 2GHz Athlon, Crafty gets 1,230,931 nps. > >(2.0 / 1.8) x 1,761,569 = about 1,957,298 nps on a 2GHz Opteron > >So, clock for clock, Crafty is 1,957,298 / 1,230,931 = 1.59 times faster (60%) >on an Opteron, while Deep Sjeng was 70% faster. I suspect Eugene was using his >magic unreleased compiler also, which probably produces faster executables than >gcc. But that is speculation. > >So either Deep Sjeng is bitboard based, or the expected advantage that bitboard >engines were going to get that non-bitboard engines were not going to get does >not exist. Or I'm overlooking something else. > >Thoughts? If you look at these results from www.spec.org, http://www.spec.org/cpu2000/results/res2003q3/cpu2000-20030908-02472.html http://www.spec.org/cpu2000/results/res2003q3/cpu2000-20030908-02502.html which were run on nearly identical opteron systems, one 32 bit using Intel C compiler, and the other 64 bit using gcc, the results are slower or only slightly better for the 64 bit compiler, except for crafty, which is 33% faster. The bitboard functions should make up nearly all the advantage of 64 bit code. I find this speedup remarkable.
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.