Author: Gregory Owett
Date: 10:55:32 11/02/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 02, 2005 at 13:22:45, Premraj Natarajan wrote: >On November 02, 2005 at 10:57:35, Gregory Owett wrote: > >>Recently, I launched two tournaments (ponder off) with the same participants, on >>two different machines. Here results: >> >>On P4 2.2 T=15'+5" : >> >>1. Fruit 2.2.1 KS104 7,5 / 10 >>2. Shredder 9 UCI 5,5 >>3. Shredder 7.04 CLm1 5 25,00 >>4. Fruit 2.2.1 Uri 5 23,00 >>5. Shredder 8 CLD 3,5 17,25 >>6. Fruit 2.2.1 3,5 16,50 >> >> >>On AMD x2 dual core 4800+ T=15'+5" : >> >>1. Shredder 8 CLD 6,5 / 10 >>2. Fruit 2.2.1 Uri 6 >>3. Fruit 2.2.1 KS104 5 25,75 >>4. Fruit 2.2.1 5 24,25 >>5. Shredder 9 UCI 4,5 >>6. Shredder 7.04 CLm1 3 >> >> >>The success of Shredder 8 CLD (UCI) on the dual core machine, confirms what the >>task manager indicated, i.e. which Shredder 8 CLD, in spite of it is >>single-threaded engine, used 99% of the two processors, while all the others >>used 50%, in other words, only one processor. >> >>(Native engines, as F8, J9, H9, CT15 etc...use 99% too.) >> >>Peter Kasinski thinks that Windows task manager is confused and carryforwards >>incorrectly. >> >>Is there another explanation? >> >>Gregory > >It is true that Shredder 8 isnot Deep engine that doesnot mean it is single >threaded engine while it is using 2 threads, Shredder 8 is itself a Deep engine >or u might call it multi threaded so we find shredder 8 would have been running >2 times faster in dual core and hence played better. > >Prem Yes, it is my opinion too. Gregory
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.