Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 01:14:31 01/14/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 14, 2006 at 00:23:51, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On January 13, 2006 at 17:07:23, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On January 13, 2006 at 15:11:43, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On January 13, 2006 at 13:34:52, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >>> >>>>On January 13, 2006 at 11:46:19, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On January 13, 2006 at 03:52:34, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On January 13, 2006 at 01:07:52, Aloisio Ponti Lopes wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Did someone test this? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>A. Ponti >>>>>> >>>>>>I saw CEGT is now testing dual programs and had Shredder 9.12x64 SMP on top of >>>>>>the ratingslist (but with few games). >>>>>> >>>>>>I hope they can more as it will be interesting to see the actual ELO gain from >>>>>>SMP. >>>>>> >>>>>>-- >>>>>>GCP >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>I don't see why it would be any different at all, than just comparing to a CPU >>>>>that is X times faster, since that is all SMP does. I'd expect my dual 2.8 to >>>>>be about as fast as a single 5ghz processor, assuming everything else (memory, >>>>>cache, processor internals, etc) are identical... >>>> >>>>Bugs. >>>> >>>>-- >>>>GCP >>> >>> >>>I ignore that angle. As bugs could come in any flavor, including a non-SMP >>>program... >> >>Of course bugs can also be in non smp programs but there are bugs that are only >>in smp version so the only way to know how much smp version is stronger is to >>test the smp version and not to test faster processor that you believe to be the >>same. >> >>I can add that different programs get different speed improvements from 2 >>processors. >> >>Uri > >That's certainly true enough. But if you allow the existance of bugs, then no >comparison is possible. Are you saying Crafty is bug-free? Ahaha. >I've played enough games with my program to know that >it doesn't do strange things. If someone shows up with an untested program, >who cares how it does. >I've seen non-SMP programs do bizarre things due to a lack >of testing as well. But allowing that into the discussion negates everything. Realistically, the SMP mode of most programs is a lot less tested than the normal mode, because almost noone used to have a dual machine before the X2 arrived. So the chance of some serious issue being left in there are always bigger. Deep Fritz lost a game in the 2004 WCCC because of an SMP bug. You think Fritz wasn't tested in advance? How can you "leave bugs out of the discussion" when 80% of our programs strength is probably solely determined by bugs that we do or do not have? -- GCP
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.