Author: Ricardo Gibert
Date: 18:52:41 07/08/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 08, 1999 at 08:07:48, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On July 07, 1999 at 01:05:15, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>The AMD-K6-III is a breakthrough because the second level cache runs >>at full processor speed. If you have (say) a 450 Mhz K6-III the >>second level cache will run at 450 Mhz too instead of the old 100 Mhz. >> >>Now to chess programs and its effects, chess programs with small >>evaluation functions will hardly profit from this new technique. >>Chess programs with a big evaluation function will profit a lot. >> >>Rebel's speed-up is about 100%. CST speed up is 125% which is >>no surprise for me becuase CST has the largest eval of all. >> >>Ed Schroder > >exactly. cstal runs better on AMD k6-2 than on any intel pentium1 due to >bigger cache. >the pentium2 is faster than the same k6-2, but not much faster. >and the k6-3 is faster than the pentium2. >in the end cstal win95 runs 2.x times faster on a k6-3 than on >a k6-2 of the same speed. > >thats brilliant !!! Look at http://www.rebel.nl/bench.htm and you will see that the 450mhz K6-2 edges out (barely) a 450mhz Xeon despite 512K cache running at full processor speed and the K6-2 not having the 256K cache of the K6-3. This is on Rebel10. Apparently, in this case, it is the L1 cache where half is reserved for instructions, not data that makes the biggest difference. The other cache seems to vacate instructions frequently by the transposition table accesses. As for cstal, apparently the programmer is doing something right if he can achieve that big of an improvement over the K6-2 with the K6-3. It has been my experience that programmers generally do a poor job of taking advantage of the speedups possible with cache. Cstal seems to prove this.
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.