Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 07:32:52 08/25/05
Go up one level in this thread
On August 24, 2005 at 12:27:11, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On August 24, 2005 at 12:05:09, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On August 24, 2005 at 08:59:28, Thomas Logan wrote: >> >>>On August 24, 2005 at 08:47:33, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On August 24, 2005 at 08:20:25, Thomas Logan wrote: >>>> >>>>>Does anyone have scaling figures for various deep programs >>>>> >>>>>and systems with 2 dual core processors >>>>> >>>>>Tom >>>> >>>>hi, i just started a test at my k7 single cpu machine >>>>to compare an output created at a quad dual core 1.8Ghz. >>>> >>>>The test is over 213 positiosn and statistical significant. >>>> >>>>I expect results within 2 weeks. >>>> >>>>You can calculate what time it takes 70 minutes * 213 positions. >>>> >>>>one thing already seems sure: >>>> >>>>x86-64 has no scaling problems with big hashtables, x86 has. >>>> >>>>Vincent >>> >>>Hello Vincent >>> >>>Thank you >>> >>>Are you using Diep ? >>> >>>Any knowledge concerning Fritz, Junior or Shredder >>>Please post your results when obtained >> >>Shredder is scaling 3.3 at quad single core, so that'll be like scaling of 4 at >>dual core quad or so? >> >>junior was single core and fritz will not be scaling well either (deepfritz8). >> >>We know all this already from 8 cpu Xeon machines in fact. See results donninger >>posted once. >> >>If you don't run well at 8 cpu xeon then forget dual core. > > >Not necessarily. 8cpu xeon was a kludge. Has same memory bandwidth as a 4-cpu >xeon. Which means extra 4 cpus just cause a significant memory bottleneck. I >ran on one of these multiple times. Programs with little memory traffic scale >well, but those that require any reasonable memory access fall flat. Dual cores >are not quite that bad but have the same basic problem, two cpus sharing a >single hypertransport and single memory controller, so each node (AMD >terminology) has internal contention that the single-core boxes do not. > >But the problems are solvable... except perhaps for the 8-way xeon which is >just a bad box... at least the ones I tested on (Dell was one vendor) were... 8 cpu Xeon was great for Diep. I tested at one of the sheikh's 8 cpu Xeons (no hyperthreading) and it's very fast. Latency to memory is around 700ns when all 8 cpu's are busy. Perhaps not so great for Crafty, but diep can work excellent with it. > >> >>>Thanks again >>> >>>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.