Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:52:34 12/09/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 08, 2003 at 20:59:26, Slater Wold wrote: >On December 08, 2003 at 19:59:51, K. Burcham wrote: > >>On December 08, 2003 at 19:49:04, Slater Wold wrote: >> >>>I remember the original itanium being really horrible. Hell, the SPEC numbers >>>are pretty terrible. >>> >>>But does anyone have any info with the original itanium and Crafty, or any other >>>chess SW? How horrible was it? >>> >>> >>>TIA! >> >>Slater, here is the Itanium 667 mhz, Jan. 2001, running Tom Kerrigan chess >>benchtest. very slow. >> >>As second test we have Tom Kerrigan's Simple Chess Program, a small program >>explicitly written to stress the processors branch predictors to the limit. The >>tool does this by a simulation of a game of chess. After calculating a number of >>moves three times the average speed of the processor in MIPS is produced. The >>EPIC hardware would theoretically be capable of outperforming IA-32 processors >>on this kind of activities but the x86 - IA-64 converter didn't do the job very >>well. The score of the Itanium would make you cry here too, even the Pentium 100 >>outperformed it while the 1,5GHz Pentium 4 was 20 times as fast >> >>http://www.tweakers.net/reviews/204/8 > >Ok, that's the itanium doing 32. Anyone got anything with it doing 64? Or did >it suck there too? The original was not very good. Itanium-2 (Mckinley) is _very_ good. Close to the opteron even though it is clocked at 1/2 the opteron's speed.
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.