Author: Mike Byrne
Date: 05:41:36 02/07/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 07, 2004 at 08:39:42, Mike Byrne wrote: >On February 07, 2004 at 08:20:37, Drexel,Michael wrote: > >>Comparison Win32 executables with identical Crafty.rc file for AMD 2000+ >>processor: >> >>Skinner 3.2.2004: >> >>Crafty v19.10 >> >>White(1): bench >>Running benchmark. . . >>...... >>Total nodes: 71227364 >>Raw nodes per second: 962531 >>Total elapsed time: 74 >>SMP time-to-ply measurement: 8.648649 >>White(1): >> >>Byrne 2.2.2004: >> >>Crafty v19.10 >> >>White(1): bench >>Running benchmark. . . >>...... >>Total nodes: 71227364 >>Raw nodes per second: 890342 >>Total elapsed time: 80 >>SMP time-to-ply measurement: 8.000000 >>White(1): >> >>Corbit 4.2.2004: >> >>Crafty v19.10 >> >>White(1): bench >>Running benchmark. . . >>...... >>Total nodes: 79723137 >>Raw nodes per second: 937919 >>Total elapsed time: 85 >>SMP time-to-ply measurement: 7.529412 >>White(1): >> >>It seems Skinners executable is clearly the best for AMD computers. >>Thanks to all for making them available. >> >>Michael > > >Interestingly, the Byrne exectuable is faster on Skinner's computer than his >own. I have rec'd an email from Peter stating this. > >================================================================ >Windows XP Professional - 2.0Ghz Pentium 4 768 megs ram. > >Byrne Crafty PGO >White(1): bench >Running benchmark. . . >...... >Total nodes: 89942714 >Raw nodes per second: 719541 >Total elapsed time: 125 >SMP time-to-ply measurement: 5.120000 >White(1): > >Byrne Crafty SE > >White(1): bench >Running benchmark. . . >...... >Total nodes: 89942714 >Raw nodes per second: 795953 >Total elapsed time: 113 >SMP time-to-ply measurement: 5.663717 >White(1): > >Peter's Crafty Compile > >White(1): bench >Running benchmark. . . >...... >Total nodes: 89942714 >Raw nodes per second: 719541 >Total elapsed time: 125 >SMP time-to-ply measurement: 5.120000 >White(1): >=============================================================== > >So it's back to the old adage -- "your mileage may vary". I think this also >demostrates again that the AMD processors are usually better for chess than >Intel P4 that run from 1.7 Ghz to at least 2.4 Ghz - I'm not sure about newer >processors. BTw, for my p4 1.7 Ghz, I also get results similiar to Peter - about 10% faster than his executable.
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.