Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Which Intel Core is better for Chess ( more info)

Author: Nolan Denson

Date: 22:35:42 03/29/04

Go up one level in this thread


The improvements seen above aren’t bad at all, however remember that this sort
of a reduction is necessary in order to make up for the fact that we’re now
dealing with a 55% longer pipeline with Prescott.

The areas that received the largest improvement (> 10% fewer mispredicted
branches) were in 176.gcc, 197.parser, 252.eon, 253.perlbmk and 254.gap. The
176.gcc test is a compiler test, which the Pentium 4 has clearly lagged behind
the Athlon 64 in. 197.parser is a word processing test, also an area where the
Pentium 4 has done poorly in the past thanks to branch-happy integer code.
252.eon is a ray tracer, and we already know about 253.perlbmk; improvements in
254.gap could have positive ramifications for Prescott’s performance in HPC
applications as it simulates performance in math intensive distributed data
computation.

The benefit of improvements under the hood like the branch prediction algorithms
we’ve discussed here is that they are taken advantage of on present-day
software, with no recompiling and no patches. Keep this in mind when we
investigate performance later on.

We’ll close this section off with another interesting fact – although Prescott
features a lot of new improvements, there are other improvements included in
Prescott that were only introduced in later revisions of the Northwood core. Not
all Northwood cores are created equal, but all of the enhancements present in
the first Hyper Threading enabled Northwoods are also featured in Prescott.




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.