Author: Thomas Logan
Date: 09:22:43 08/25/05
Go up one level in this thread
On August 25, 2005 at 10:37:32, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On August 24, 2005 at 14:50:46, Thomas Logan 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. >>> >>So you believe Shreder scale fairly well on a quad > >Scaling 3.3 is very ugly from a quad. > >Please don't mix scaling with speedup, just like Bob did do. > I understand the kns vs ply/time distinction Any idea what the actual speedups of the commercials might be 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.