Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 14:40:54 11/15/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 14, 2005 at 14:31:48, Theo van der Storm wrote: >On November 13, 2005 at 23:24:31, enrico carrisco wrote: > >>On November 13, 2005 at 20:49:56, Jorge Pichard wrote: >> >>>On November 13, 2005 at 13:17:38, Eduard Nemeth wrote: >>> >>>>Much stronger than all other programs! >> >>According to the official website, DIEP used stronger hardware than Zappa. >> >>-elc. > >There is no statement that DIEP used stronger hardware than Zappa. >The official website says: > >Zappa 2xAMD dual-core Opteron, 2200 MHz >Diep Quad Opteron 2400 MHz > >As a first very crude step in the comparison: >2 x 2 x 2200 Mcycles = 8800 Mcycles >is faster then >4 x 2400 Mcycles = 9600 Mcycles. That is wrong. I'd take 4 x 2400mhz any day. 9600mhz > 8800mhz in the math I use. :) Plus I'd rather have two single-core cpus rather than one dual-core. Or in this case, four single-cores rather than 2 dual-cores. > >furthermore: >If from >http://www.amd.com/us-en/Processors/ProductInformation/0,,30_118_8796_8800~97051,00.html >we may conclude that a dual AMD Opteron processor gives about 86% additional >power in comparison with single processors at the same speed, >Diep has an even bigger advantage. > >Still, a thourough analysis using chess programs as benchmark >on the actual machines is required to prove your statement. >Evidently the tournament organisation does not have access >to these machines, so it is beyond their(our) scope. > >Can anyone present real measurements? > >Theo
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.