Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:15:28 08/25/05
Go up one level in this thread
On August 25, 2005 at 10:34:35, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On August 24, 2005 at 15:16:34, 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? >> >>Don't see why. I get somewhere around 3.0 on a quad. I'm getting reasonably >>close to 6 on the 8-way box. Will have lots of numbers to post later once all >>the runs finish. > >Bob perhaps not mix scaling and speedup, they are 2 different things. NO they aren't. Only in the somewhat corrupted use here in CCC. Scaling is, and always has been, a measure of how an application's performance improves as the number of processors is increased. NPS is one type of scaling, but it is very primitive and useless other than to identify and fix hardware bottleneck issues. The _real_ issue of "scaling" is about parallel search speedup. You can find this in any good book on parallel computing... > >>But no reason 3.3 on 4 translates to 4.0 on 8. That is hardly a straight-line >>fit of anything. >> >> >>> >>>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. >>> >>>>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.