Author: vladan
Date: 02:42:05 10/28/05
Go up one level in this thread
On October 27, 2005 at 12:24:36, Ernest Bonnem wrote: Dear Mr. Bonnem, It is very hard to find universal benchmark from all past, present and future machines. Also, the speed and chess engine strength depends also on software (not only hardware, clock etc.). Some compilers use some machine speed up details, some don't. The same C chess engine, compiled with same compiler under different parameters produces different speed and strength. I belive that Axon Benchmark gives solid and optimal hardware performance ratings. Some other tests and benchmarks prove it also. Regards, Vladan ps. Thanks Djordje for some good explanations abou Axon Benchmark. >For some reason, your Axon Benchmark only gives a 10-12% advantage to Athlon 64 >compared to Athlon XP (given the same frequency). >From the tests I have seen in the CCC Forum, with different chess programs, the >advantage is more like 20% (see also the FritzMark, in kNodes/sec). >Perhaps your Axon v1.0 chess engine is not representative of today's main chess >programs... > > >On October 27, 2005 at 06:04:29, vladan wrote: > >> >>Dear mr. Nielsen, >> >> >>Thank you for using Axon Benchmark. >> >>Mr. Sedat was very kind to collect and present the most completed Axon Benchmark >>list on his site. >> >>For benchmarking, the program uses my embedded Axon v1.0 chess engine, and >>analyzes one special middlegame position. The engine is totally written in >>assembly language, it is the mixture of 16 and 32 bit machine instructions. It >>does not use MMX extensions, 64 instructions or other special processor features >>(instruction sets, logic processors etc.). >> >>Only one standard processor in system (single CPU, primary and secondary hash) >>is the test object. >> >>These facts determine its compatibility. It is very useful to test and compare >>chess engines running only on single processors which have similar software >>structure. Also it measures very precisely processor architecture advances >>connected with chess engines. As you noticed FX 2600 MHz machine has 50% better >>chess performances using only about 33% higher clock frequency. Better >>architecture. And that’s it. >> >>If you intend to use multiprocessor engines (like Fritz or Shredder) on >>multicore or multithreading processors you must use their own benchmarks. >> >>The method of using start position for benchmarking is a little obsolete. If you >>do it in that way, it is much better to download some standard EPD tests. Almost >>all modern interfaces (Shredder Classic, Arena, ChessBase …) have the option to >>analyze EPDs with different engines. >> >> >> >> >>Best regards, >> >> >>Vladan Vuckovic, >> >>the author of Axon Benchmark.
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.