Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 13:50:10 02/10/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 10, 2000 at 14:35:24, Peter Kappler wrote: >On February 10, 2000 at 10:52:38, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>On February 10, 2000 at 10:13:16, Thorsten Czub wrote: >> >>>On February 10, 2000 at 01:04:50, Lonnie Cook wrote: >>> >>>>On February 09, 2000 at 23:30:14, Thorsten Czub wrote: >>>> >>>>>On February 09, 2000 at 23:00:35, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Integrated = on-die. So it should be running at the same speed as the core. But >>>>>>the design of the L2 cache may have increased latencies, so it's possible that >>>>>>it won't be as fast as some people think it "should" be. >>>>>> >>>>>>-Tom >>>>> >>>>>hm. >>>>>whatever - could be a killer-cpu for cstal. >>>> >>>>I have run CSTal a little Thorsten and I was getting 50-60K on mine >>> >>>on 1000 ? >>> >>>that would be 3.3 - 4 times faster than on my k6-3/400 ! >>>nice nice nice. >> >>That's because the KryoTech 1000 Mhz L2-cache runs at 400 Mhz. I hope >>my new toy will arrive tomorrow :-) >> >>Ed > > >Hi Ed, > >When will we get a chance to see this machine in action in a GM Challenge game? > >--Peter I would hope "never". This is not exactly the most reliable thing to do to hardware. Remember that for every system hang you see, there were hundreds of thousands of cases where an instruction produced the wrong result but was in "user-land" where it didn't crash anything. It is incredibly risky to overclock when 'it counts'.
This page took 0.04 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.