[Computer-go] OT: prices for fast computer-go hardware

Petr Baudis pasky at ucw.cz
Sun Nov 7 19:27:05 PST 2010

On Mon, Nov 08, 2010 at 02:37:03AM +0100, Petr Baudis wrote:
>   Hi!
> On Sun, Nov 07, 2010 at 07:37:33AM -0500, Don Dailey wrote:
> > I think you get the most bang for the buck with the i7-980x,  which is not
> > really the same chip as the other Intel chips,  and I think they are coming
> > out with improved versions of that if they have not already.    This has 6
> > real cores (and 6 additional pseudo cores.
>   Yes, I was looking at i7-970, which is quite similar. (I don't aim at
> overclocking too much, I don't think I can fit a lot of cooling into a
> 2U rack server.)
>   However, now I'm seriously torn between taking one i7-970 or two 6134
> (which should be the same as 6174 just with 8 cores inst. of 12):
>   http://iltsarnews.blogspot.com/2010/03/amds-opteron-6174-12-cores-magny-cours.html
> It seems to bode extremely well in the benchmarks. Two 6134 are just
> a bit more expensive than an i7-970, and if I extrapolate the scores
> (which is a rther lame, but what can I do?):
> 	2x6174 -> 2x6134: 49372*8/12 = 32915
> 	2xX5670 -> 1xi7-970: 35868/2 = 17934 (i7-970 has faster clock,
> 					but slower QPI and memory)

...and another woodoo with numbers:

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html i7 970 = 10073
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/multi_cpu.html 4x6174 = 29627

Then, trying to convert 4x6174 to 2x6134: 29627/2*8/12 = 9875.

So in _this_ one, 2x6134 would come off slightly worse than 970. But who
knows if the scores are even comparable.


				Petr "Pasky" Baudis
The true meaning of life is to plant a tree under whose shade
you will never sit.

More information about the Computer-go mailing list