Author: Gregory Owett
Date: 11:46:35 11/02/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 02, 2005 at 14:19:43, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On November 02, 2005 at 12:08:31, Gregory Owett wrote: > >>On November 02, 2005 at 11:19:49, Gian-Carlo Pascutto 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, >>> >>>Shredder 8 is, as far as I know, a multiprocessing-capable engine. >>> >>>-- >>>GCP >> >>That would be a very good news! :-) Thus all these engines: fritz, shredder, >>hiarcs,...were multiprocessing-capable. The established classification would be >>upset on dual core machines. > >Fritz and Hiarcs are not multiprocessing capable. Only the Deep versions are. >Hiarcs doesn't have a Deep version. > >Old Shredder versions were, essentially, both single and dual versions at the >same time, but Stefan stopped doing this in Shredder 9. > >So, Shredder 8 is multiprocessor capable, but Shredder 9 is not, you need Deep >Shredder 9 instead. > >-- >GCP Then, how you explain, that for Fritz and Hiarcs the taskmgr indicates 99% when they are pondering? 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.