diep wrote:
Speaking is silver, testing is gold.
i5 has less memory channels than i7. 2 versus 3, so i5 is a lot worse than i7.
for diep HT works magnificent, and when overclocking a cpu to 4.5Ghz or so it works even better, just like hiarcs team also reported they turned on HT for hiarcs on the overclocked 12 core @ 24 logical core box. 4.65ghz or so overclocked during tournament?
At those speeds HT gives for diep 30% or so. At 3.xGhz it's more like 20%.
And yes - it does search deeper.
By the way you can also see it in testresults from Lostcircuits how bad i5 is.
At 3.7Ghz (turboboost) it's 1.0M nps versus C2Q doing better there if you extrapolate its speed.
http://www.lostcircuits.com/mambo//inde ... itstart=16
Of course the gulftown and sandy-bridge 6-core cpu's total dominate, as they have 50% more cores and in case of sandy bridge 4 memory channels.
But that's another story...
Dear Vincent,
Honestly i am surprised ...
I did not know that about there is any chess engine with HT ON,where its chess speed performance to be better than HT OFF ?!
So...Diep with HT ON has better performance than Diep with HT OFF ?
Can you confirm with HT data (testings,games,benchmarks...) please ?
In my testings,its quite clear that Houdini 2.0c with HT OFF performs much better than Houdini 2.0c with HT ON
Just i'd like to mention and confirm again that Houdini 2.0c with HT ON is much slower in solving the mates than Houdini 2.0 HT OFF
I have no Diep chess engine and i can not check it,thats why its will be great if you inform us about:
1)Have you tested both systems between each other in Auto232 mode (i mean Diep HT ON against Diep HT OFF) ?
2) If you have already a such useful HT Auto232 Test:what is the ELO difference between HT ON and HT OFF ??
If you have no HT Auto232 test (still you did not test them to play against each other),then you can not be sure !!
The higher kns values dont mean that HT ON is faster or better
In other words: the most important is the Chess Speed-ELO Performance (not higher kns values)
So...in my opinion,the best way to measure which system is better for chess:
-HT OFF and HT ON should be played against each other in Auto232 mode (on two identical separate machines)
1) PC A (Hyper Threading ON-enabled from bios)
2)PC B (Hyper Threading OFF-disabled from bios)
Note:for the Hyper-Threading test should be used same neutral book and same chess engine
One thing more,actually i see a lot of comments here...but unfortunately no any useful data (exception my HT ON /HT OFF mate benchmarks)
Come on dear Friends,
Is anybody have any serious data for the current HT issue
But next time please no more comments,i prefer to see HT testings,HT games,HT benchmarks...
BTW,another notes by Robert Houdart about Hyper-Threading:
Houdini 2 will automatically limit the number of threads to the number of logical processors of your hardware.
If your computer supports hyper-threading it is recommended not using more threads than physical cores,
as the extra hyper-threads would usually degrade the performance of the engine.
Q: I'm running Houdini on a Core i7 CPU with hyper-threading. Would you recommend to use hyper-threading with Houdini?
The architecture of Houdini (and of chess engines in general) is not very well suited for hyper-threading;
using more threads than physical cores will usually degrade the performance of the engine.
Although the hyper-threads often produce a slightly higher node speed, the increased inefficiency
of the parallel alpha-beta search more than offsets the speed gain obtained with the additional hyper-threads.
To give a practical example, it's more efficient to use 4 threads running at 2,000 kN/s each than 8 threads
running at 1,100 kN/s each, although the latter situation produces a higher total node speed.
For this reason it's best to set the number of threads not higher than the number of physical cores of your hardware.
Best,
Sedat
