Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: ICC match Rybka 32-bit v Quad Shredder 30'/game resumes ...

Author: Andreas Guettinger

Date: 13:20:57 01/16/06

Go up one level in this thread


On January 16, 2006 at 16:05:18, George Sobala wrote:

>On January 16, 2006 at 16:04:22, Andreas Guettinger wrote:
>
>>On January 16, 2006 at 15:59:53, George Sobala wrote:
>>
>>>On January 16, 2006 at 15:51:37, Andreas Guettinger wrote:
>>>
>>>>On January 16, 2006 at 15:30:15, Ingo Bauer wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On January 16, 2006 at 15:24:39, Andreas Guettinger wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On January 16, 2006 at 14:27:57, Albert Silver wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On January 16, 2006 at 14:02:04, George Sobala wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On ICC right now:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Rybka 1.01 Beta 10d 32-bit on a (mere) Pentium M 1.6GHz (Fishlet)
>>>>>>>>v
>>>>>>>>Deep Shredder on an Apple Quad 4x2.5GHz (Redshift)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Could you give an idea as to what this might be equivalent to for a WinBox? In
>>>>>>>other words, would this be as fast as Deep Shredder running on an Athlon 4800+X2
>>>>>>>and the like? Faster? Slower?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>                                        Albert
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>By calculation it would be equal to 7.5 Ghz of a Athlon64 or Opteron box (for
>>>>>>Chess), because the 2.5 Ghz PowerPC G5 is 0.75 times as fast as a Athlon64 3400
>>>>>>2.4 Ghz.
>>>>>>I don't know what the Ghz of a Athlon 4800. It would be similar as 1 x 7.5 Ghz,
>>>>>>2x 3.75 or quad 1.9 Ghz for multithreading.
>>>>>
>>>>>I operated Shredder at the IPCCC in Paderborn on a Quad Mac with 2.5 GHz. We
>>>>>calculated that it is as fast as an Quad Opteron at 2.5 GHz (+/- 10%). A single
>>>>>G5 is slower than a single Opteron (for chess!) but the speedup for 4 CPUs seems
>>>>>to be better. The overall result is about equal.
>>>>>
>>>>>Btw: Seeing it that way a quad Mac is one of the cheapest available systems with
>>>>>that much "chess calculating power"!
>>>>>
>>>>>Bye
>>>>>Ingo
>>>>
>>>>Interesting. I only compared the NPS of single process engines and didn't take
>>>>in account the speedup.
>>>>Actually I would have thought the difference would be even bigger if a Intel
>>>>compiler and optimizations would be used for the Athlon/Opteron.
>>>>Maybe the 2 Gb of L2 Cache per CPU (4 Gb total) that is shared for 2 cores each
>>>>makes a difference.
>>>>
>>>>If somebody has a Athlon 4800 X2 with Deep Shredder and a testposition we could
>>>>make a comparision.
>>>>
>>>>regards
>>>>Andy
>>>
>>>The Apple Quad is certainly outstanding bang per buck.
>>>
>>>Deep Shredder x 4 runs at about 1.5 million nodes per second in midgame,
>>>accelerating up to about 2 million nps as the position simplifies.
>>>
>>>How does Shredder do on fast Opterons?
>>
>>
>>>I will turn on move kibitzing for Deep Shredder, and you can compare your
>>>Shredder nps as you watch.
>>
>>Comparing your to my Apple Quad would be boring. ;)
>>
>>- Andy
>
>"Your" was plural! Learn some grammar! :)

Sorry, but could you say this again in german? :)

regards
- Andy






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.