I've been Googling and hunting around but can't find the answer .. so ..
does anyone know what, if any, use Fritz9 will make of Dual core CPUs
(AMD X2, for instance) .. or do they expect me/us to go buy 'Deep Fritz
n' to get any multi-threading benefit from PCs which look suspiciously
(OK 'exactly') like dual CPU systems?

I've got Fritz6, which is a bit long in the tooth now (not that I can
actually beat it or anything. 8.) .. it's mostly used for analysis ..
will Fritz9 do better/faster, or would I be better off buying some other
engine to use in parallel with F6?

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Contact recommends the use of Firefox; SC recommends it at gunpoint.

"GSV Three Minds in a Can" wrote in message
...
I've been Googling and hunting around but can't find the answer .. so ..
does anyone know what, if any, use Fritz9 will make of Dual core CPUs (AMD
X2, for instance) .. or do they expect me/us to go buy 'Deep Fritz n' to
get any multi-threading benefit from PCs which look suspiciously (OK
'exactly') like dual CPU systems?

I have just a 2.4 Ghz CPU and just about every chess engine I use makes full
use of the processor (ie 90-99%) during calculations/analysis. Even with
Deep Fritz, I don't see what advantage multithreading would provide when a
single core processor can be fully exploited as it is.

Obviously if it's a different story if you had two CPUs to exploit.

Good luck

LSD



I've got Fritz6, which is a bit long in the tooth now (not that I can
actually beat it or anything. 8.) .. it's mostly used for analysis ..
will Fritz9 do better/faster, or would I be better off buying some other
engine to use in parallel with F6?

LSD wrote:
"GSV Three Minds in a Can" wrote in message
...

I've been Googling and hunting around but can't find the answer .. so ..
does anyone know what, if any, use Fritz9 will make of Dual core CPUs (AMD
X2, for instance) .. or do they expect me/us to go buy 'Deep Fritz n' to
get any multi-threading benefit from PCs which look suspiciously (OK
'exactly') like dual CPU systems?


I have just a 2.4 Ghz CPU and just about every chess engine I use makes full
use of the processor (ie 90-99%) during calculations/analysis. Even with
Deep Fritz, I don't see what advantage multithreading would provide when a
single core processor can be fully exploited as it is.

Obviously if it's a different story if you had two CPUs to exploit.

A dual core *is* essentially two CPUs.

--
GCP

GSV Three Minds in a Can wrote:
I've been Googling and hunting around but can't find the answer .. so ..
does anyone know what, if any, use Fritz9 will make of Dual core CPUs
(AMD X2, for instance) .. or do they expect me/us to go buy 'Deep Fritz
n' to get any multi-threading benefit from PCs which look suspiciously
(OK 'exactly') like dual CPU systems?

Fritz does not support multiprocessing.

ChessBase expects you to buy the (2x as expensive) Deep Fritz.

--
GCP

"Gian-Carlo Pascutto" schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
GSV Three Minds in a Can wrote:
I've been Googling and hunting around but can't find the answer ..
so ..
does anyone know what, if any, use Fritz9 will make of Dual core
CPUs
(AMD X2, for instance) .. or do they expect me/us to go buy 'Deep
Fritz
n' to get any multi-threading benefit from PCs which look
suspiciously
(OK 'exactly') like dual CPU systems?

Fritz does not support multiprocessing.

ChessBase expects you to buy the (2x as expensive) Deep Fritz.

Since we have the Euro 4 times as expensive as they just converted
Mark to Euro 1:1 ...

Mike

"Gian-Carlo Pascutto" wrote in message
...
LSD wrote:
"GSV Three Minds in a Can" wrote in message
...

I've been Googling and hunting around but can't find the answer .. so ..
does anyone know what, if any, use Fritz9 will make of Dual core CPUs
(AMD
X2, for instance) .. or do they expect me/us to go buy 'Deep Fritz n'
to
get any multi-threading benefit from PCs which look suspiciously (OK
'exactly') like dual CPU systems?


I have just a 2.4 Ghz CPU and just about every chess engine I use makes
full
use of the processor (ie 90-99%) during calculations/analysis. Even with
Deep Fritz, I don't see what advantage multithreading would provide when
a
single core processor can be fully exploited as it is.

Obviously if it's a different story if you had two CPUs to exploit.

A dual core *is* essentially two CPUs.

Not really, and particularly not in the context of chess engine
applications. A system with a 4.0Ghz dual core processor is NOT the same
as a system with dual 4.0Ghz processors. Yes, both systems can multithread.
And yes, the operating system recognizes the dual core processor as two
independent processors. But the combined number-crunching power of the two
cores in the single processor system is capped at 4.0Ghz, whereas the
combined number crunching power of the dual processor system would be 4.0Ghz
+ 4.0Ghz = 8.0Ghz.

Having two cores in a single processor allows you to multithread, which
gives the opportunity to fully exploit the CPU's power more often and in
more applications. But chess applications are already able to fully exploit
the CPU, typically utilitizing 90-99% of CPUs power.

Here comes the point I was making: There's no advantage to having dual
cores for a chess engine, because the engine can already tap one core for
99% of the CPU's power. Working two cores each at 50% of the CPUs power
isn't any advantage.

However, and as I said, obviously it's different if you have two 4.0Ghz CPUs
to exploit. Then a multithreading engine can exploit 99% of *each* 4.0Ghz
processor, which is effectively double the calculation speed of the single
processor system.

That's all I was saying. Who knows, maybe I am wrong.

LSD

LSD wrote:
"Gian-Carlo Pascutto" wrote in message
A dual core *is* essentially two CPUs.


Not really, and particularly not in the context of chess engine
applications. A system with a 4.0Ghz dual core processor is NOT the same
as a system with dual 4.0Ghz processors. Yes, both systems can multithread.
And yes, the operating system recognizes the dual core processor as two
independent processors. But the combined number-crunching power of the two
cores in the single processor system is capped at 4.0Ghz, whereas the
combined number crunching power of the dual processor system would be 4.0Ghz
+ 4.0Ghz = 8.0Ghz.
[...]
That's all I was saying. Who knows, maybe I am wrong.

You are *completely* wrong.

You seem to be confusing hyperthreading with dual core CPUs.

Hyperthreading = one CPU that pretends to be two
Dual core = TWO CPUs that share one physical packaging

--
GCP

Bitstring , from the
wonderful person Gian-Carlo Pascutto said
LSD wrote:
"Gian-Carlo Pascutto" wrote in message
A dual core *is* essentially two CPUs.


Not really, and particularly not in the context of chess engine
applications. A system with a 4.0Ghz dual core processor is NOT the same
as a system with dual 4.0Ghz processors. Yes, both systems can multithread.
And yes, the operating system recognizes the dual core processor as two
independent processors. But the combined number-crunching power of the two
cores in the single processor system is capped at 4.0Ghz, whereas the
combined number crunching power of the dual processor system would be 4.0Ghz
+ 4.0Ghz = 8.0Ghz.
[...]
That's all I was saying. Who knows, maybe I am wrong.

You are *completely* wrong.

You seem to be confusing hyperthreading with dual core CPUs.

Hyperthreading = one CPU that pretends to be two
Dual core = TWO CPUs that share one physical packaging

Yup, an AMD 4800x2 is effectively two 2.4 Ghz CPUs, although they have
to share a hyper transport channel to the real world, not having as many
pins as two CPUs would have. Intel's Pentium-D is the same way (only
cr&ppier).

Sounds like the Fritz folks haven't quite wised up - most other vendors
(even, amazingly, M$oft) have decided to settle for charging single CPU
rates for X2 processors, rather than going 'Its s server, pay me twice'.
I guess you could run 2 separate copies of Fritz for free, but I'd
really like to get both CPUs working on the =same= problem. 8. Don't
think I'm going to pay DeepFritz prices though ...

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Contact recommends the use of Firefox; SC recommends it at gunpoint.

"Gian-Carlo Pascutto" wrote in message
...
LSD wrote:
"Gian-Carlo Pascutto" wrote in message
A dual core *is* essentially two CPUs.


Not really, and particularly not in the context of chess engine
applications. A system with a 4.0Ghz dual core processor is NOT the
same
as a system with dual 4.0Ghz processors. Yes, both systems can
multithread.
And yes, the operating system recognizes the dual core processor as two
independent processors. But the combined number-crunching power of the
two
cores in the single processor system is capped at 4.0Ghz, whereas the
combined number crunching power of the dual processor system would be
4.0Ghz
+ 4.0Ghz = 8.0Ghz.
[...]
That's all I was saying. Who knows, maybe I am wrong.

You are *completely* wrong.

You seem to be confusing hyperthreading with dual core CPUs.

Hyperthreading = one CPU that pretends to be two
Dual core = TWO CPUs that share one physical packaging

Yes, I see what you mean, and you're right, I guess there are three
scenarios:
1) hyperthreading CPU
2) dual core CPU (with 1/2 total Ghz to each processor)
3) Dual CPUs (with Ghz x2).

I was interchanging the first two.

LSD wrote:

Yes, I see what you mean, and you're right,

Umm, isn't there some sort of rule against admitting error on Usenet?
I think that you are required to call people Nazis instead... grin

I guess there are three scenarios:

1) hyperthreading CPU
2) dual core CPU (with 1/2 total Ghz to each processor)

Nope. #1 gets 1/2 total Ghz to each processor. #2 is the same as
#3 as far as clocking goes.

3) Dual CPUs (with Ghz x2).

And..4) Dual hyperthreading cores (2 actual CPUs, each hyperthreaded
so the operating system thinks there are 4 total.)

Also dual core CPUs have the same clocking scheme as dual CPUs.