Author: Chessfun
Date: 04:13:03 11/04/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 04, 2005 at 06:04:34, Greg Simpson wrote: >Tablebase access can easily saturate the disk IO, so having two engines using >them at once could be a problem. You could buy a small second hard disk and >store a copy of the tablebases there and avoid this problem by directing one >engine to use the tablebases on the main disk and the other the tablebases on >the secondary disk. > >Other than tablebases, there should be some slow down from memory bus contention >when two engines are running, mostly from hash table access I guess (hard to >cache). I don't think think this would be a big issue for the X2 processors, >but like you I would be interested if anyone could provide some real data. > >If you don't want to run ponder on you could get a bigger benefit from the dual >core system by running two matches at once. That is exactly what I am doing right now x2 4200+. Except with tablebases I have identical 5 piece placed on the same drive. C:\Nalimov and C:\Nalimov 1 told each program in options where to go and thus far no problem. Originally probing the same folder C:\Nalimov was a problem. Haven't noticed any other problems. If the two interfaces are CB then you need to install the path to bases different naturally when installing the software, so you'll end up with two locations where the tournaments or matches are taking place. Sarah.
This page took 0.01 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.