Author: Eugene Nalimov
Date: 17:25:43 12/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 10, 2003 at 19:24:12, Brian Richardson wrote: >On December 10, 2003 at 18:38:03, Eugene Nalimov wrote: > >>On December 09, 2003 at 20:22:16, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On December 09, 2003 at 16:12:46, Brian Richardson wrote: >>> >>>>On December 09, 2003 at 09:52:34, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On December 08, 2003 at 20:59:26, Slater Wold wrote: >>>>> >>>> >>>>snipped >>>> >>>>>>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. >>>> >>>>Actually, McKinley was also pretty poor, IIRC. I had emailed Bob some Crafty >>>>bench command test results. Now the 3rd generation Madison is much better. >>> >>> >>>Eugene was close to 1M nodes per second at 1ghz. I don't think I have his >>>numbers immediately handy but he might supply them again... >> >>I don't remember exact numbers, but on 1GHz Itanium2 (McKinley) Crafty got >>something like 900-1000knps when executing "bench" command. Not great, but >>reasonable good number. >> >>On 1.5GHz Itanium2 (Madison) Crafty is getting 1,357knps. >> >>If necessary I can send executable to Bob, so any volunteer can run his/her own >>tests. >> >>Thanks, >>Eugene > >The 900Knps was for 2 CPUs; 1 CPU was about 500Knps, according to the log files >(note for Crafty 18.15, Intel compiler, no assembler, no profiling). > >Non-recompiled 32bit binary was _much_ slower, of course. Ok, I found 900MHz/1.5Mb cache system nearby. Here are the results: D:\Documents and Settings\eugenen>\\eugenen6\crafty\wcrafty.exe Initializing multiple threads. System is SMP, not NUMA. EPD Kit revision date: 1996.04.21 unable to open book file [./book.bin]. book is disabled unable to open book file [./books.bin]. Crafty v19.6 (1 cpus) White(1): bench Running benchmark. . . ...... Total nodes: 100409437 Raw nodes per second: 749324 Total elapsed time: 134 SMP time-to-ply measurement: 4.776119 White(1): quit I expect 1GHz/3Mb cache system to be ~20% faster -- 10% due to higher frequency, and 10% due to larger cache (or higher cache associativity -- I reported effect of 1.5Mb cache vs. 3Mb cache here some time ago). 750knps*1.2 == 900knps, so it will be roughly the number I gave from memory... Thanks, Eugene
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.