On 2006-01-28, James wrote:

Hi!

PIV D 3.2Ghz 1M cache
WIN32 1CPU : 70
WIN32 2CPU : 56
WIN64 1CPU : 51
WIN64 2CPU : 31
LIN32 1CPU : 80
LIN32 2CPU : 45
Intel compiler LIN32 1CPU : 70
Intel compiler LIN32 2CPU : 45

Opteron 146 2Ghz 1M cache
LIN64 1CPU : 49

Pentium M 1.6Ghz 1M cache
WIN32 1CPU : 70
LIN32 1CPU : 80
Intel compiler LIN32 1 CPU : 70

- The intel compiler is better than gcc for this application on single
CPU machine.

Should give you better results for almost all calculations.
Use their Fortran compiler and even coding Fortran 77
intel's results are a lot faster then the versions from gcc.
So I'd strongly underline that the above effect for crafty
on linux results from using gcc which slows it down. Tried
both versions on my box as well (using gcc3 compared to
intel8) and always found gcc's code slower than intel for
crafty.

It is the default compiler in Robert Hyatt's makefile

(Never got that makefile do anything usefull without editing
it

- The Pentium M is extremely fast, as fast as a PIV with
twice its frequency.

This is quite impressive, not? I see this also on other
applications, so actually I do not understand why there is a
beast called "desktop processor" at all. They should just
stop that line... But well, maybe they own some shares of
the big fan producers or electricity companies.

BTW: all machines that died on this cluster here died
because the cpu fans malfunctioned or the power supplies
went up in smoke. So requireing less from those components
might enhance system lifetime considerably.

It looks like a pentium M 2.2Ghz could be indeed a very
good choice, at least for crafty with WIN32 (perhaps a bit
expensive, but the 2.0Ghz is affordable).

One sould consider here also that those machines are by
definition mobile as there seems to be no desktop board
supporting mobile chips

Besides it could be that one get's ones hands on a pretty
cheap pentium M at some say 1.6GHz which is already in the
upper league of the Pentium IV's you tested above.

So it's left to ones own calculations in what setup one
get's most for the money. I'd at the moment argue for some
nice T model from IBM. Maybe some rest post or some T41/42
returning from a leasing company? (IBM now is unfortunately
lenovo, don't know where this story will end.)

--

Kind regards,
Alexander Wagner

Alexander Wagner wrote:


It looks like a pentium M 2.2Ghz could be indeed a very
good choice, at least for crafty with WIN32 (perhaps a bit
expensive, but the 2.0Ghz is affordable).


One sould consider here also that those machines are by
definition mobile as there seems to be no desktop board
supporting mobile chips

Not true Alexander -

Various manufacturers have developped motherboards for the M processor
socket (mPGA479M), DFI being one of them:
http://www.hardocp.com/article.html?art=NzA5
and they work flawlessly...

AsusTek has already announced the N4L-VM DH motherboard (with Socket
479) to support Intel's new line of mobile processor, the intel core
solo and intel core duo (previously Yonah).
http://www.techreport.com/etc/2006q1/ces/index.x?pg=6

I'll post some tests on these beasts as soon as we get one.

James

Just in case anyone is interested I thought I would post an update with
what I actually purchased!
After 'consulting' with many other people via the Net I decided to go with
the dual-core Athlon.
My new system specs follow:

Case Lian Li PC-6070BW Plus Mid Tower
Power Supply Thermaltake W0049RA, 680W, Auto Control
Motherboard ASUS A8N-SLI, Socket 939
CPU Athlon 64 X2 4800+, 2.4Ghz
Hard Drives Seagate Barracuda ST3250824AS, 250GB, 8MB cache, SATA-2/300 x
2
DVD writer Pioneer DVR-110D, DVD 16R/16W/8RW
DVD writer LG Electronics GSA-4167BBK, DVD 16R/16W/8RW, CD 48R/48W/32RW
Memory Kingston ValueRAM 1GB x 2, DDR-SDRAM, DDR400
Video card Leadtek GeForce PX7800GT, 256MB, DVI, HDTV
Sound card Creative Sound Blaster Audigy 2 ZS, PCI
Monitor DELL (Samsung) 2405FPW 24 inch widescreen LCD
Speakers Logitech Z-5500 Digital, 4x62W Satellites, 69W Center, 188W Sub
Woofer
DV/Video capture/TV Tuner card Compro VideoMate DVB-T300

Unbelievably I was unable to purchase a 'decent' DVD-ROM drive, so for an
extra $25 I
purchased a second DVD burner.
Thanks to everyone for their advice.
My next question is will implementing RAID1 have a detrimental effect on
my systems
performance?
TIA.


--

RocketMan
"Gian-Carlo Pascutto" wrote in message
...
RocketMan wrote:

My main question is whether I should go with one of the new dual-core
processors, or would I be better to stay with the faster (clock speed)
single core processors?

You need to factor in the price tag, and whether you use dual-capable
programs, or multiple (demanding) programs at the same time.

Do the dual-core processor 'behave' like two separate CPUs?

Yes.

I do not
currently own (or plan on purchasing) any of the Chessbase 'Deep'
engines,
so would there be any advantage using a dual-core processor system with
for
example, Fritz 9?

There is no advantage (for non-Deep engines), unless you, for example,
want to have it analyzing and do some other demanding task at the same
time.

I have noticed that with hyperthreading enabled on my
laptop that the benchmark runs slightly better (987 - 971),

The Fritz benchmark "cheats" in the sense that it will use the second
processor, even though it can't actually use it for playing games or
analyzing.

I assume that the dual-core processor (or
hyperthreading) would have little/no effect on the playing of other
games,
e.g. car-racing.

A dual-core CPU is something entirely different than hyperthreading.
With hyperthreading, you only have one core that is pretending to be
two, and there is almost never a speedup. A dual core, well, that's
another matter.

More and more programs will take advantage of a second CPU. I believe
video drivers from one company (dont remember if it was ATI or Nvidia,
or both) are already designed to take advantage of them, so it would
help all games.

My other question is whether to purchase an AMD or Intel CPU. I
certainly
do not wish to start a 'CPU war of words', but I think I read here
previously that AMD had better integer processing, or something, so it
was
better for chess. Would I notice any difference between the two
companies?

You would pay more and get less performance when you buy an Intel. This
may or may not change in the future.

I must say I have always bought Intel up until now, and if I purchase a
dual-core processor I will almost certainly purchase Intel.

Very bad idea right now. Just look at some tests of the CPUs in your
price range.

--
GCP

RocketMan wrote:

My next question is will implementing RAID1 have a detrimental effect on
my systems
performance?

If you use a HW controller, chances are you'll notice less of it than
if you do it in software. But then, if you will do mostly-writing,
RAID1 may become a bottleneck no matter what.

If you are concerned, measure the performance you are interested in
before and after.

But this is really a question that is better to ask in a hardware
or raid-related forum.
--
Anders Thulin ath*algonet.se http://www.algonet.se/~ath