Author: Gregor Overney
Date: 21:58:45 07/11/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 10, 1999 at 01:50:04, KarinsDad wrote: >On July 10, 1999 at 01:20:05, Gregor Overney wrote: > >[snip] >> >>Since your are still undecided but intend to write your own Chess code, consider >>this: >> >>Get a 21264 Alpha based system with 4 or 8 MBytes of L2. Then you get 64K/64K >>for L1 and plenty for L2. It's a good improvement compared to the 21164 with >>8K/8K for L1, and 96K for L2, and 2 to 8 MBytes for L3. Digital has recognized >>that three level staged caching creates too much overhead. I am afraid that the >>AMD will suffer exactly under the same problem. An even better example of >>efficiency is the PA-8500. It only has L1 cache 1M/0.5M (no L2, no L3). >> >>But even the old 21164 at 600 MHz is a solid chip for 64-bit computing. Systems >>are available for 2 to 3 k$. >> >>Gregor > >Thanks, but no thanks. I work with Alphas (and Intels) every day and I have >found the Alphas to be dogs. Now this is probably not true for a processor heavy >program like a chess program and the higher end systems with 21264s, but I >consider the Alpha motherboards (at least for the EV4s and earlier) to be vastly >inferior (so talking to every other system component is dog slow). > >And, I am not buying a full blown system, but just the ATX case, motherboard, >memory, and chip. Ever since Karin came along, an extra $2 to $3 K just doesn't >seem to be in the picture anymore. :) > >Thanks for the suggestion though. > >KarinDad :) I understand your point of view. The extra 2 to 3 k$ that are required for an Alpha can be difficult to justify. Following your experience, I never found the Alpha (or its components) to be "dog slow" when compared to an Intel-based system. I am also running my code on PA-RISC's, ALPHA, and Intel systems. My preference goes with the Alpha and Linux. But that's based on high performance computing with lots of CPU intensive code. Chess programs are a relaxing side effort. Most of the time, I am running simulations that need lots of floating point calculations (quantum computing, LDA, molecular dynamics, simulators dealing with classical fields for MS). With regard to Chess, I found that even an "older" 21164/500 is doing a fine job when used to run brute-force searches that "only" require ints. I prefer Linux to NT. But that's just my personal opinion. I wish you luck in choosing the best system for your needs. Have fun. Gregor
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.