Author: George Sobala
Date: 13:30:27 01/16/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 16, 2006 at 16:20:57, Andreas Guettinger wrote: >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 In any case, it looks as though the Apple Quad will retire from competitive chess after this match, and go into politics instead.
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.