Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 09:09:48 08/20/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 20, 2004 at 07:59:02, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 20, 2004 at 06:04:09, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On August 20, 2004 at 04:39:10, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >> >>>On August 20, 2004 at 00:52:19, Dann Corbit wrote: >>> >>>>On August 20, 2004 at 00:29:26, Stuart Cracraft wrote: >>>> >>>>>Hi, >>>>> >>>>>I've got an old Pentium 3 @ 1ghz and want to get >>>>>something faster that will be good for chess. >>>>> >>>>>How do today's Intel and AMD chips stack up >>>>>compared to the above. 3x? 4x? 10x? >>>> >>>>2.2 GHz AMD 64 bit should be about 3x that fast. >>> >>>While that may be true for floating point and vector dependent programs, I'd be >>>surprised if it's the case for chess programs. From what I've observed, the P3 >>>is rougly equivalent to any Athlon in terms of performance/MHz. The P4 is >>>slower. >>> >>>-Tom >> >>I use AMD 1 ghz and Athlon64 3000 that is 2ghz for chess programs. >>Based on my experience the athlon64 2ghz is nearly 3 times faster for movei(I do >>not remember exact numbers at this moment) >> >>I also get more than 2 times speed improvement for other programs. >>I will check later exact speed difference to give better results. >> >>The AMD 1 ghz is only slightly faster than previous pentiumIII 800Mhz and >>PIII850 mhz that I used and it seems to me that there is no big difference >>between AMD 1 ghz and pentium1 ghz. >> >>Uri > >Here is some comparison with movei analysis of the opening position between 2 >ghz and 1 ghz > >I used 64 mbytes for the search in both systems > >2 ghz > >depth=13 +0.25 e2e4 e7e5 b1c3 b8c6 g1f3 g8f6 f1b5 f8b4 d1e2 d8e7 b5c4 e8g8 e1g1 >Nodes: 50584642 NPS: 544564 >Time: 00:01:32.89 > >Movei needs 4:21.83 to produce the same analysis on A1000mhz. > >it is 261.83/92.89 faster that is slightly more tan 2.8 speed improvement. > >Fritz even earns more from the new hardware > >New game - Yace 0.99.87 >rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKBNR w KQkq - 0 1 > >Analysis by Fritz 8: > >1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd7 4.Nf3 Nf6 > = (0.09) Depth: 7/20 00:00:00 29kN >1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.Nc3 Nb4 4.a3 N4c6 > = (0.16) Depth: 8/23 00:00:00 92kN >1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 d5 3.exd5 Qxd5 4.Nc3 Qd7 5.d4 Nf6 > = (0.06) Depth: 9/26 00:00:00 212kN >1.Nf3! > = (0.09) Depth: 9/26 00:00:00 217kN >1.Nf3 Nf6 2.d4 d5 3.Bf4 Nh5 4.Bg5 h6 5.Bd2 > = (0.06) Depth: 10/26 00:00:00 306kN >1.e4! > = (0.09) Depth: 10/30 00:00:00 446kN >1.e4 Nf6 2.e5 Nd5 3.d4 d6 4.Nf3 Nc6 5.Bb5 > = (0.19) Depth: 10/30 00:00:00 694kN >1.e4 d5 2.exd5 Qxd5 3.Nc3 Qd6 4.Nf3 Nf6 5.d4 Bg4 6.Bb5+ c6 7.Be2 > = (0.19) Depth: 11/32 00:00:02 2247kN >1.e4 Nc6 2.Nf3 e5 3.Bc4 Bc5 4.d4 exd4 5.Ng5 d5 6.Bxd5 Ne5 > = (0.16) Depth: 12/36 00:00:04 5361kN >1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4 Nxe4 4.Bd3 d5 5.dxe5 Bb4+ 6.c3 Bc5 > = (0.22) Depth: 13/40 00:00:12 14018kN >1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4 Nxe4 4.Bd3 d5 5.Nxe5 Nd7 6.0-0 Qf6 7.Bb5 c6 > = (0.19) Depth: 14/42 00:00:25 28647kN >1.e4 e5 2.Nf3 Nf6 3.d4 Nxe4 4.Bd3 d5 5.Nxe5 Nd7 6.0-0 Nxe5 7.dxe5 Qh4 > = (0.16) Depth: 15/40 00:00:59 68219kN > >(, MyTown 20.08.2004) > >Fritz on the old hardware needed >38 seconds to get depth 13 >76 seconds to get depth 14 and >178 seconds to get depth 15 with same number of nodes. > >2ghz on athlon64 2ghz seems to be about 3 times faster than1 ghz on every >machine for chess programs. > >Note that I verified that it is only 2 ghz against 1 ghz by looking at the >details(they say 2.01 ghz but this difference is not very importance) > >I chose with the mouse: >start->setting->control panel->system > >Here are the details that I got: > >1)I can see for the new computer >computer Athlon(tm) 64 processor 3000+ >2.01ghz >1 ghz of RAM > >2)I can see for the old computer: >AMD Duron(tm) Processor >AT/AT compatible >187,888 KB RAM > >I understand that tm means thousand mhz that is 1 ghz. > >Based on this comparison it seems that 2 ghz is about 3 times faster than 1 ghz >for chess programs(I do not know the reason and it may be because of other >components that are important that are not more mhz when they are not in the old >computers) and the fact that PIV has another handicap is not relevant(I used in >the chess world computer championship PIV with 2.8 ghz and it was clearly slower >than the 2 ghz of the athlon that I use(I think nearly 1.5 times slower but I >did not claulcate exact numbers). My mistake then, I take it back. The Athlon 64 and the Duron have somewhat different cores--you are probably seeing the benefits of the newer core. Chess programs don't tend to be affected by components other than the processor. -Tom
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.