Author: Jasmine Baer
Date: 14:01:28 03/11/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 11, 2004 at 16:47:47, David Mitchell wrote: >On March 11, 2004 at 13:07:41, Jasmine Baer wrote: > >>I need some real-world advice. >> >>I have become addicted to letting my chess engines fight it out on >>www.playchess.com with other engines. Now, it pains me to stop my PC from >>playing chess so that I can do real work on it. :-) So... I intend to build a >>chess-only PC. >> >>I would like to build a dual-cpu PC partly because I have never done so before, >>and partly because those look like the ones that perform the best on the >>playchess server. Which of the following set-ups would you all recommend for me >>to build? Keep in mind, I want the system that will be able to hold its own >>against some of the better PCs out on playchess.com - i.e. Elo's around 2800 on >>a consistent basis. Also keep in mind that I prefer NOT to spend more than >>$1,500. >> >>System 1: Dual Athlon MP >>Tyan S2466 Mobo >>Kingston 512 MB DDR PC2100 RAM >>2600+ Athlon MP x 2 >>Antec 550W EPS 12v PSU >>Plus the assorted IDE HD, CDRW drive, O/S, floppy, etc. >>PRICE: $,1,144 >> >>System 2: Dual Xeon DP >>Tyan S2723 Mobo >>Kingston 512 MB DDR PC 2100 RAM >>2.66 GHz Intel Xeon x 2 >>Antec 550W EPS 12v PSU >>Plus the assorted IDE HD, CDRW drive, O/S, floppy, etc. >>PRICE: $1,474 >> >>For my purposes (goofing off playing chess online and letting it analyze >>positions, etc. - basically, all my chess playing needs will be on this system), >>is the Xeon system really worth $300 more? Will it perform longer? Is it more >>stable? Will it be "better" on the playchess server? >> >>I'm not worried about which one can do MP3s faster or handle game graphics >>better. I've got a 2.8 Ghz P4 for that kind of stuff. All I am looking for is >>something that can run about 20 hours/day and play chess on the server and >>analyze positions. >> >>Please provide some good feedback. I value all of your opinions, and I want to >>get the most for my dollar. >> >>Thanks. >>-Erik > >First question is, can your engine even use two CPU's? If it isn't set up to >run in parallel, it won't be a benefit to it's performance. Computer matches can >be run easiest on a dual though. > >The real world (as opposed to what?) answer is, although AMD processors are >generally best for chess, your program should be tested on both, and >performances compared. > >The key to longevity is IMO quality components (which you seem to have spec'd >out already), quality electricity (brown outs and spikes wreck havoc on >integrated electronics), and a relatively cool operating environment. > >Cleanliness may not be biblically tied to godliness, but it is "heavenly" to >electronics. Dirt stops the fan's air from cooling properly, and may vastly >shorten expected lifetime of the device. > >I hate to poke a pin at your "what openings commercial engines play", question, >but that data has already been collected for many thousands of CC, sorted out in >great detail, and is on the web. I don't have the url, but I saw it just >recently, so perhaps someone here can chime in with the address. > >Whatever you buy, remember it will be only so-so by next year. Look for >something you really will enjoy even though it's not one of the fastest, >anymore. > >dave Thanks, Dave. Certainly sound advice. As far as the openings thing goes, you know how sometimes you just have to accumulate the data and see for yourself? That's the way I am with this. I'm fascinated by finding that EngineX is much more successful with 1.d4 than with 1.e4. I'm not trying to do a doctoral dissertation! :-)
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.