Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:27:59 08/19/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 19, 2004 at 10:15:01, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >On August 18, 2004 at 22:18:24, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On August 18, 2004 at 17:08:03, Dan Honeycutt wrote: >> >>>On August 18, 2004 at 16:59:07, David H. McClain wrote: >>> >>>>I am not sure what hardware Shredder is using. Nevertheless, in general terms, >>>>can an evaluation of any advantage be assessed with hardware of Hydra vs. >>>>Shredder? >>>> >>>>DHM >>> >>>It was reported that Shredder is using the same quad Opteron that it used in >>>WCCC. But how you decide who has a hardware advantage when the platforms are so >>>different is beyond me. >>> >>>Dan H. >> >> >>Saying that Hydra has a _huge_ hardware advantage is easy. Trying to precisely >>quantify how large that advantage is is not so easy... > >Honestly, I am not so sure how big that advantage is. Hydra runs on 16 >processors instead of 4, so for the same nps it is less efficient. In addition, >his cards can't probe the hash table in the last few ply which also leads to a >lot of duplicate work. I have a suspicious Hydra gets a speedup of 4 or so . . >. >anthony Wouldn't begin to speculate there. I was looking solely at hardware. Which is simply way faster for Hydra with special-purpose hardware. How efficient the parallel search is, loss from hash table issues, etc, is a question without enough information to answer at present...
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.