Author: Frank E. Oldham
Date: 21:26:24 03/01/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 01, 2004 at 22:53:39, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On March 01, 2004 at 18:57:03, Frank E. Oldham wrote: > >>On March 01, 2004 at 18:05:55, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>> >>>So all we know it's a slow CPU, that's all. How slow is not clear simply. >>> >> >>Slow? It's not quite up to opteron levels, but with the poor gcc compiler (e.g., >>won't pass bitboard in a register) I get: >> >>crafty19.10 w/futility bench >> >>1 x 2GHz G5 >>Total nodes: 89942714 >>Raw nodes per second: 1249204 >>Total elapsed time: 72 >>SMP time-to-ply measurement: 8.888889 >> >> >>2 x 2GHz G5 >>Total nodes: 83479388 >>Raw nodes per second: 2455276 >>Total elapsed time: 34 >>SMP time-to-ply measurement: 18.823529 >> >>Frank > >The testsets they benchmarked publicly the G5, they used GCC for the x86 >hardware. Then they claimed victory. Later those tests were compiled by decent >compilers and eated that G5 alive. > >Anyhow, you won't find the G5. > >Bob already got 2.2+ Mln nps at his outdated dual Xeon 2.8Ghz by the way. > >I get 1.2MLN nps at my old K7 MP2600 already single cpu. > >There is 3.2Ghz Xeons and of course new generation Nocona and Opterons are there >now. Try a dual opteron with pathscale compiler and crafty and you'll see. > >Power4 at 1.7Ghz is nowhere impressive: > >http://www.spec.org/osg/cpu2000/results/res2004q1/cpu2000-20040126-02725.html > >This despite using unified caches. > >Your G5 is such a cpu with less cache that's all. > >What is your RAM and RAM timings? Just 512MB (PC3200 - CL3) straight from Apple. I'd like to have a dual opteron but they're pretty expensive :-) Crafty benefits from the 970's single-instruction FirstOne() -- but gcc 3.3 doesn't generate very good code yet -- supposedly the IBM compiler(s) are better (but a bit expensive). Frank
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.