Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 14:21:52 05/24/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 24, 2004 at 15:04:25, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On May 24, 2004 at 14:48:30, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On May 24, 2004 at 14:37:06, Slater Wold wrote: >> >>>On May 24, 2004 at 14:32:38, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On May 24, 2004 at 14:09:56, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On May 24, 2004 at 12:56:56, Slater Wold wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On May 24, 2004 at 12:29:04, Russell Reagan wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On May 24, 2004 at 12:06:46, Slater Wold wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>In a thread below, there is a post about Blargh, ICCs top computer. It has won >>>>>>>>60% of its games at standard time controls, and only lost 16% in almost 3,000 >>>>>>>>games! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I am interested to know the OoO (opinion of outcome) of EVERYONE at the >>>>>>>>following experiment, I will be in contact with the operator of Blargh, and will >>>>>>>>try to set this up. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Crafty 19.13 on an AMD FX53 (64-bit) vs Shredder 8 on a Dual Opteron 2.2Ghz >>>>>>>>(32-bit) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>10 game match. 120/0. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Opinions? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Crafty on equal hardware probably doesn't stand a realistic chance against >>>>>>>Shredder. Only Fritz scores at least 45% against Shredder on the latest SSDF. >>>>>>>Junior and Hiarcs score at least 40%. Crafty would be behind those engines on >>>>>>>equal hardware by a non-trivial margin (take the Junior-Crafty 10x experiment >>>>>>>for example). >>>>>> >>>>>>OoO please... >>>>>> >>>>>>>What is interesting about a Shredder-Crafty match where Crafty is at a hardware >>>>>>>_disadvantage_? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>BTW, that really explains a lot about why he is #1 on ICC. You have a freakin' >>>>>>>FX53 and you're at a hardware disadvantage! Wow... >>>>>> >>>>>>It's a disadvantage, but a small one. How small? >>>>> >>>>>It is at least 2x disadvantage. >>>>> >>>>>You did notice that box is a _dual_??? >>>>> >>>>>Shredder has an SMP version which I would assume he is using... >>>> >>>>Comeon you need to be NUMA to run well on a dual opteron in 32 bits. Shredder is >>>>SMP and has not released a 64 bits executable yet for xp64. >>> >>>A point not everyone is getting, obviously... >> >>Yes, shredder is missing a factor 3 somewhere thanks to this. >> >>It's faster single cpu A64 in 64 bits than dual Xeon 3.2Ghz >> >>single cpu net2003 default compile 32 bits, latest diep version 45% faster at >>2.2Ghz opteron than 2.127Ghz K7. >> >>So single cpu version 135k nps (both numa & smp version) >>NUMA version scales factor 2.0, SMP version from diep gets 180k nps >>at dual opteron 2.2Ghz. This all in 32 bits mode. SMP version might suffer >>though from fact that dual machine has not all banks filled with RAM yet. >> >>I hope later today to have a go at 64 bits XP (if i can get it to work there so >>soon, no clue how to lock in 64 bits XP). >> >>Shredder and DIEP, in contradiction to crafty, do a lot of RAM lookups. >> >>So NUMA versus SMP is a bigger penalty. >> >>Based upon hard facts extrapolation for shredder at dual opteron in 32 bits >>means : 1.5 * 1.45 = 2.175 times faster in nps. >> >>Crafty 32 bits executable (version 19.3 was only one i found so quick at his >>ftp) at bob's ftp gets 770k nps at 2.2Ghz opteron. > >Please do not make up numbers when actual 2.2ghz opteron log files are available >on my ftp box. Crafty gets 2M on a 2.2ghz opteron, period... Windows executable at your ftp in 32 bits gets 770k. period. > >> >>Is it in nps more than 2 times faster at opteron in 64 bits than this? > >See above and check the log files for yourself. And 32 bit crafty doesn't do >770K nodes per second. That is slower than a single 2.4ghz xeon, much less my >2.8's and beyond... that's a bogus number. Then you basically say that your ftp site has worthless executables. Oh by the way it doesn't compile SMP under windows at all. Seems i'm one of the few who now and then compile your achillesheel.... > >> >>If so then having a native 64 bits compile for opteron has more effect than a >>dual opteron in 32 bits mode for that exe. >> >>>>Equal hardware SSDF shredder8-crafty : 43.5 - 3.5 >>> >>>I was going to look that up later, thanks! >>> >>>So we can expect in a 10 game match, nothing better than 9 - 1 from Crafty, >>>based on SSDF results. Interesting... >> >>more like 10-0 >> >>Just use a book that is not committing suicide for shredder. >> >>Faster hardware shredder extrapolates its rating better than crafty. >> >>Of course do not forget to use book.bin for crafty and no commercial books.
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.