Hello all
As I am not happy with the standard Benchmarks to compare a CPU I run a bit of a more extensive Test with 20 Single Engines. This is the result:
The colored numbers at the end might help calculation your desired speed.
The AMD 6 core 1055T in this test is running with 0.1V below the specification by AMD. With a 29€ air cooler it is at 40°C when all 6 cores are running! Looking at the price of this it isnt the worst choise!
Bye
Ingo
Comparision C2/Phenom2/i7
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 4190
- Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 1:47 am
Re: Comparision C2/Phenom2/i7
1055T you can run with a stock cooler at 3.7GHz (and default voltage) without any problem.IWB wrote:The AMD 6 core 1055T in this test is running with 0.1V below the specification by AMD. With a 29€ air cooler it is at 40°C when all 6 cores are running! Looking at the price of this it isnt the worst choise!
-
- Posts: 550
- Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 9:31 am
- Location: Belgium
Re: Comparision C2/Phenom2/i7
If you do same test and running with all real cores..the AMD Phenom II X6 1055T with a overclock like Milos say @3.7Ghz will get the highest nodes!
This cpu is the best Chess/Performance/Price cpu from today!
Next one maybe the Bulldozer...price?
JP.
This cpu is the best Chess/Performance/Price cpu from today!
Next one maybe the Bulldozer...price?
JP.
-
- Posts: 1539
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 2:02 pm
Re: Comparision C2/Phenom2/i7
Hi
Nevertheless, the popular Fritzmark favors Intel by 10%, This means that as long as people are comparing CPUs with Fritzmark, AMD has to be 10% better to get equal ...
Bye
Ingo
I already have problems doing it with one core. You see that I have diffeences in speedup of +13% to -9% for an engine. I tried doing this with 2 cores and found the differences even bigger. Comparing a CPU like this seems to be like comparing apples and oranges to me. Actually this comparision, with all cores, makes only sense if you tend to use only ONE engine. If you want to use multiple engines, your favorite engine will always be faster on that other CPU brand (Murphy!)jpqy wrote:If you do same test and running with all real cores...
Nevertheless, the popular Fritzmark favors Intel by 10%, This means that as long as people are comparing CPUs with Fritzmark, AMD has to be 10% better to get equal ...
Bye
Ingo
-
- Posts: 6401
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 8:30 pm
- Location: Chicago, Illinois, USA
Re: Comparision C2/Phenom2/i7
I have seen serious accusations that the intel compiler chooses, on purpose and deceptively, not to optimize code running on AMD with the same aggressiveness that it does on intel. There are apparently some court battles. So, you have to be very careful with which compiler some of the programs have been compiled.IWB wrote:Hi
I already have problems doing it with one core. You see that I have diffeences in speedup of +13% to -9% for an engine. I tried doing this with 2 cores and found the differences even bigger. Comparing a CPU like this seems to be like comparing apples and oranges to me. Actually this comparision, with all cores, makes only sense if you tend to use only ONE engine. If you want to use multiple engines, your favorite engine will always be faster on that other CPU brand (Murphy!)jpqy wrote:If you do same test and running with all real cores...
Nevertheless, the popular Fritzmark favors Intel by 10%, This means that as long as people are comparing CPUs with Fritzmark, AMD has to be 10% better to get equal ...
Bye
Ingo
Miguel
-
- Posts: 3533
- Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 8:33 pm
- Location: Antalya, Turkey
Re: Comparision C2/Phenom2/i7
michiguel wrote:I have seen serious accusations that the intel compiler chooses, on purpose and deceptively, not to optimize code running on AMD with the same aggressiveness that it does on intel. There are apparently some court battles. So, you have to be very careful with which compiler some of the programs have been compiled.IWB wrote:Hi
I already have problems doing it with one core. You see that I have diffeences in speedup of +13% to -9% for an engine. I tried doing this with 2 cores and found the differences even bigger. Comparing a CPU like this seems to be like comparing apples and oranges to me. Actually this comparision, with all cores, makes only sense if you tend to use only ONE engine. If you want to use multiple engines, your favorite engine will always be faster on that other CPU brand (Murphy!)jpqy wrote:If you do same test and running with all real cores...
Nevertheless, the popular Fritzmark favors Intel by 10%, This means that as long as people are comparing CPUs with Fritzmark, AMD has to be 10% better to get equal ...
Bye
Ingo
Miguel
I have run Intel and AMD compiles of same engine on Intel computers
and found out that AMD ones are faster than Intel ones (around 10 %).
Strange?
hi, merhaba, hallo HT
-
- Posts: 1539
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 2:02 pm
Re: Comparision C2/Phenom2/i7
Here is the same list with 4 core engines:
What is intersting:
While the Phenom was 6% slower with the same clock it is 7% faster with 4 cores! Even the distance to the i7 is geting closer by 2%.
When assuming the C2 as a gold standard, the differences on the Phenom for a quad are up to 46% and for the i7 even 78% ...
These differences in speed between the Core2 and the Phenom and even more the i7 is huge (78% is more than another doubeling of the cores)! The CPUs are so different, that an adaption of different speeds for a rating list by changing a time level is impossible when MP engines are tested vs different CPU architectures!
Even for single engines on different hardware there is a gap between engines of 20% which can not be addapted with an adaption of time, but 20% might be accepted as "noise" by someone.
Bye
Ingo
What is intersting:
While the Phenom was 6% slower with the same clock it is 7% faster with 4 cores! Even the distance to the i7 is geting closer by 2%.
When assuming the C2 as a gold standard, the differences on the Phenom for a quad are up to 46% and for the i7 even 78% ...
These differences in speed between the Core2 and the Phenom and even more the i7 is huge (78% is more than another doubeling of the cores)! The CPUs are so different, that an adaption of different speeds for a rating list by changing a time level is impossible when MP engines are tested vs different CPU architectures!
Even for single engines on different hardware there is a gap between engines of 20% which can not be addapted with an adaption of time, but 20% might be accepted as "noise" by someone.
Bye
Ingo
-
- Posts: 2041
- Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:30 pm
Re: Comparision C2/Phenom2/i7
Hi Ingo,
That's a lot of work!
But the multicore non-reproducibility shows its ugly head...
Look at the "different" results of DS 12 x64 and DS 12 32b, which should be the same (same engine, as the single-core results show). Have you run them several times, in order to get an average?
So I think one has to be very cautious with those multicore data...
That's a lot of work!
But the multicore non-reproducibility shows its ugly head...
Look at the "different" results of DS 12 x64 and DS 12 32b, which should be the same (same engine, as the single-core results show). Have you run them several times, in order to get an average?
So I think one has to be very cautious with those multicore data...
-
- Posts: 1539
- Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 2:02 pm
Re: Comparision C2/Phenom2/i7
Hi Ernest.
Bye
Ingo
Not really as this is pure NODE count. This count will be always more or less identical in the starting position.ernest wrote:Hi Ingo,
That's a lot of work!
But the multicore non-reproducibility shows its ugly head...
No need to. The difference is there on 1 core as well. I will send you the excell sheet.ernest wrote: Look at the "different" results of DS 12 x64 and DS 12 32b, which should be the same (same engine, as the single-core results show). Have you run them several times, in order to get an average?
See above - I think it is quite accurate as I ONLY count nodes, not time to depth ... or find a solution or something. Pure nodecount!ernest wrote: So I think one has to be very cautious with those multicore data...
Bye
Ingo
-
- Posts: 4190
- Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 1:47 am
Re: Comparision C2/Phenom2/i7
Never rely on this if you use multiple threads. Depth can differ even for 2 plies and node count can differ for more than 100% in two consecutive runs of the same engine from the same (starting) position. Usually differences are less drastic, but still quite visible.IWB wrote:See above - I think it is quite accurate as I ONLY count nodes, not time to depth ... or find a solution or something. Pure nodecount!ernest wrote: So I think one has to be very cautious with those multicore data...