Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 22:02:03 05/07/04
I finally located the BK test runs that I had cleverly tucked away in a directory "out of the way" so they wouldn't get removed by accident. Here is the summary. The raw logs are again at ftp.cis.uab.edu/pub/hyatt/smpdata and the filenames start with "kp" rather than the CB positions I put there for Martin. Here is the 2cpu summary: pos 1cpu 2cpua 2cpub 2cpuc 2cpud 2 34 51/0.67 25/1.36 28/1.21 35/0.97 3 139 51/2.73 45/3.09 58/2.40 74/1.88 4 154 106/1.45 84/1.83 83/1.86 84/1.83 5 175 112/1.56 105/1.67 114/1.54 109/1.61 6 145 69/2.10 70/2.07 74/1.96 70/2.07 7 110 65/1.69 71/1.55 112/0.98 111/0.99 8 115 60/1.92 66/1.74 58/1.98 60/1.92 9 171 101/1.69 104/1.64 101/1.69 94/1.82 10 95 45/2.11 43/2.21 38/2.50 41/2.32 11 97 35/2.77 55/1.76 52/1.87 56/1.73 12 147 100/1.47 113/1.30 107/1.37 114/1.29 13 153 108/1.42 98/1.56 79/1.94 83/1.84 14 137 75/1.83 88/1.56 81/1.69 87/1.57 15 86 42/2.05 42/2.05 41/2.10 42/2.05 16 141 78/1.81 78/1.81 78/1.81 77/1.83 17 38 25/1.52 21/1.81 23/1.65 21/1.81 18 154 95/1.62 60/2.57 91/1.69 72/2.14 19 128 67/1.91 57/2.25 65/1.97 58/2.21 20 96 66/1.45 63/1.52 66/1.45 66/1.45 21 123 70/1.76 70/1.76 67/1.84 74/1.66 22 98 46/2.13 48/2.04 45/2.18 45/2.18 23 137 62/2.21 61/2.25 106/1.29 106/1.29 24 87 45/1.93 43/2.02 39/2.23 44/1.98 average SU 1.82 1.89 1.79 1.76 The first col is the BK position number (1 is omitted as it is not a useful position for smp testing, it is solved too quickly to measure anything). second col is the raw 1cpu time for the last iteration completed in common with all the SMP test runs. The next 4 columns are pairs of numbers. First number is integer time in seconds for that position, second is floating point speedup to 2 decimel places. Repeated four times for four different runs. Bottom of each column is the speedup for that column summed and divided by 23... Here is the same data for the 4 cpu runs: pos 1cpu 4cpua 4cpub 4cpuc 4cpud 2 34 26/1.31 27/1.26 18/1.89 18/1.89 3 139 54/2.57 29/4.79 75/1.85 75/1.85 4 154 49/3.14 46/3.35 52/2.96 52/2.96 5 175 71/2.46 53/3.30 58/3.02 58/3.02 6 145 34/4.26 33/4.39 51/2.84 51/2.84 7 110 61/1.80 73/1.51 43/2.56 43/2.56 8 115 37/3.11 39/2.95 35/3.29 35/3.29 9 171 67/2.55 37/4.62 41/4.17 41/4.17 10 95 42/2.26 28/3.39 40/2.38 40/2.38 11 97 30/3.23 27/3.59 32/3.03 32/3.03 12 147 77/1.91 55/2.67 63/2.33 63/2.33 13 153 55/2.78 56/2.73 40/3.83 40/3.83 14 137 47/2.91 42/3.26 39/3.51 39/3.51 15 86 26/3.31 26/3.31 25/3.44 25/3.44 16 141 51/2.76 50/2.82 47/3.00 47/3.00 17 38 12/3.17 13/2.92 13/2.92 13/2.92 18 154 50/3.08 50/3.08 79/1.95 79/1.95 19 128 38/3.37 38/3.37 30/4.27 30/4.27 20 96 30/3.20 36/2.67 25/3.84 25/3.84 21 123 42/2.93 44/2.80 43/2.86 43/2.86 22 98 24/4.08 24/4.08 25/3.92 25/3.92 23 137 76/1.80 61/2.25 46/2.98 46/2.98 24 87 31/2.81 32/2.72 33/2.64 33/2.64 average SU 2.82 3.12 3.02 3.02 A couple of notes. GCP and Vincent claimed these would be "better" for SMP results. I said no. Data says no. The answer is "no". At least in the case of Crafty. I won't speak for other programs. Speedups were close to the DTS position tests posted yesterday, although the 4 processor tests are not quite as good. Now I guess perhaps with 18 log files, two different test sets, it is reasonable to conclude that my formula is pretty close. It will never be "perfect" as it has no randomness built in, while the actual data always varies from run to run. Arguing about "3.1 is wrong" is stupid. Because that argument can be made for _any single speedup number_ as I have said many times. Speedup numbers are relative to the test position set, the program, and even a bit of luck/randomness tossed in. Perhaps much urban legend can be tossed out the door now and real factual numbers can be referenced.. Of course now Vincent is off on a new tangent explaining why my speedup numbers are not fair. Because I might be able to make the program as much as 2% faster, and probably less on the Opteron, if I removed the TREE pointer required for the SMP search. To that I simply say "bullshit". :) Note: In the above data, I will give the same disclaimer as Martin. I copied the numbers and converted in my head. There _could_ be errors although I don't believe there are. Someone could check if they really care. I'm tired enough to say "I don't right now." :)
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.