Author: Drexel,Michael
Date: 07:03:03 06/21/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 21, 2004 at 08:54:01, Uri Blass wrote: >On June 21, 2004 at 06:43:00, Joachim Rang wrote: > >>On June 21, 2004 at 06:14:58, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On June 21, 2004 at 05:51:40, Joachim Rang wrote: >>> >>>>On June 21, 2004 at 05:24:33, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>I talk with a person and he tells me that Xeon2 is new technology and it is >>>>>better than opteron but it simply does not fit the price that I agree to pay for >>>>>it. >>>>> >>>>>He tells me that there are graphs that tell that Xeon2 is better. >>>>>When I tell him that people in this forum told me that pentium4 is relatively >>>>>bad he tells me that he does not trust them(note that he does not deal with >>>>>chess programs). >>>>> >>>> >>>>that's the point. Xeons are fine for certain applications and in generally I >>>>would say not worse than Opterons (but not better neither and much more >>>>expansive). >>>> >>>>For certain applications Xeons will outperform Opterons significantly and for >>>>others (such as chess programs) Opterons will outperform Xeons significantly. >>>>That is what all people in that board are telling you, so no need to ask other >>>>people who know nothing about chess performance. >>>> >>>> >>>>>He also claims that the Athlon64 is the same quality as the pentium4 that I can >>>>>get. >>>>>He agrees that the opteron is better than normal pentium4 that I can get. >>>>> >>>> >>>>this is all wrong. You can't no more make such general statements, since the >>>>performance for different purposes very widely. In general the P4 has also its >>>>merits and performs in some multimedia applciation very well, but for chess... >>>> >>>>>I am interested to know if there is some graph that shows that the opteron and >>>>>even the athlon64 is better than the xeon2. >>>>> >>>> >>>>look at the benchmarks given in this board and here: >>>> >>>>http://www.beepworld.de/members39/computerschach2/chessmarks.htm >>> >>>As far as I can see the leader is xeon and not athlon and the xeon is more than >>>twice faster in nps than second place so the reason is not having 2 processors >>>against one. >> >> >>This is misleading: the 1st entry is with two processors and HT enabled so >>apparently using 4 processors. Fritz than pushes the nps in the sky but that >>does not mean that it reaches greater depth (probably the contrary is true). >> >>DualXeon 3,565 2953 kn/s Jens H. (Deep Fritz8, 2 CPU) >> >>The "realistic" value is the 4th one: >> >>DualXeon 3,565 1326 kn/s Jens H. (Fritz8; 1 CPU) >> >>And that is an overclocked Xeon, so a standard Xeon @ 3.2 GHz would give 1190 >>knps. Compare that to 1405 with AMD 64 @ 2.2 GHz! >> >>HT is not helping chess programs as Bob pointed out here some time ago. It can >>increase the nps but it won't increase time to solution, since the faster nps >>are elliminated by more SMP-Overhead (in fact time-to-solution may be even >>worse). >> >>>> >>>> >>>>>Note that I probably decided to go for the opteron and not for the athlon >>>>>because people tell me that I cannot get responsibility for the athlon64 and are >>>>>against it. >>>>> >>>> >>>>What does that mean? The guarantee is the same, why you can't get responsibility >>>>for an AMD 64? >>> >>>I do not know. >>> >>>People tell me that I can get responsibility only for parts and not for all the >>>computer but I agree that if I go for opteron248 not from IBM there is the same >>>problem. >>> >>>I still did not buy opteron with the same speed with responsibility only for the >>>parts. >>> >>>It probably can cost me near 2000$ instead of total price near 5000$ that was >>>for opteron directly from IBM(I still do not know the total price and people try >>>to get details for me). >>> >>>Uri >> >> >>If you buy a complete system (even an assembled one according to your wishes) >>you have guarantee and responsibility for the whole system according to the laws >>in your country. IBM may extend the respnsibility in duration and service >>quality, but every complete system you are buying should come with >>responsibility. >> >>regards Joachim > >I see that they need special invitation for opteron248 and I will probably go >for something else. > >Here are the options that I probably have. > >The price is probably at least higher by 1000$ than the price of the processor. > > >1)Athlon Xp 3200 (near 430$ for the processor) >2)Athlon Xp 3400 (near 610$ for the processor)$ 10 days from today >monday next week he expect to get processor and he need to build it. >3)Athlon Fx 1000$ for processor estimated 2-3 weeks from today. >people tell me that FX is better for working 24 hours. >They do not need to do special invitation but >4)Opteron240(from IBM maybe it is here and in this case I can get it tomorrow) >5)Opteron248 1300$ for proccesor estimated time 3-4 weeks and needed special >invitation. Opteron 240 is 1.4 Ghz server processor. That's not an option. XP 3400 does not exist. Here is the official AMD pricelist(for 1000 units): http://www.amd.com/us-en/Corporate/VirtualPressRoom/0,,51_104_609,00.html The opteron248 is 690$ and the FX-53 799$. So ask your vendor why he charge such a high price for the opteron248 compared to the FX-53. That's a rip-off. Michael > >The estimated total price of 2000$ that I wrote earlier was also wrong and it >seems that I did not understand that it does not include the processor and the >motherboard. > >Uri
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.