[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Getting gnubg to use all available cores
From: |
Ingo Macherius |
Subject: |
RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Getting gnubg to use all available cores |
Date: |
Thu, 6 Aug 2009 17:34:33 +0200 |
Do you use the calibrate command or a batch analysis of matchfiles? The
former was shown to be of no value for benchmarks, see here:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnubg/2009-08/msg00006.html
With calibrate I had the very same effect of high idle times during
benchmarks, unless I used at least 8 threads per physical core.
I am doing benchmark on a 4 core machine which iterates over #thread (1..6)
and cache size (2^1 .. 2^27). Should be posted in say 3 hours, it literally
is still running :)
Ingo
> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden
> [mailto:address@hidden On
> Behalf Of Louis Zulli
> Sent: Thursday, August 06, 2009 3:21 PM
> To: Michael Petch
> Cc: address@hidden
> Subject: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Getting gnubg to use all available cores
>
>
>
> On Aug 5, 2009, at 4:02 PM, Michael Petch wrote:
>
> > I'm unsure how the architecture is deployed and how OS/X
> handles the
> > physical cores, but it almost sounds like one Physical core is being
> > used
> > (Using Hyperthreads to run 2 threads simultaneously). I wonder if
> > the memory
> > is shared across all the cores? A friend of mine was
> suggesting that
> > people
> > may have to wait for Snow Lapard to come out before OS/X properly
> > utilizes
> > the Nehalem architecture (whetehr that si true or not, I
> don't know).
> >
> > Anyway, as an experiment. If you run 2 copies of Gnubg at the same
> > time
> > (using multiple threads) do you get 400% CPU usage?
> >
>
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> Sorry for the delay. I just had two copies of gnubg analyze the same
> game, using 3 ply analysis. Each instance of gnubg used 200%
> CPU. Each
> copy was set to use 4 evaluation threads.
>
> So what's the verdict here? Is Leopard simply not directing threads
> correctly?
>
> Louis
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bug-gnubg mailing list
> address@hidden http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
- RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: gnubg bug?, (continued)
- RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: gnubg bug?, Ingo Macherius, 2009/08/05
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: gnubg bug?, Christian Anthon, 2009/08/05
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: gnubg bug?, Michael Petch, 2009/08/05
- RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: gnubg bug?, Ingo Macherius, 2009/08/05
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: gnubg bug? Baseline Information, Michael Petch, 2009/08/05
- [Bug-gnubg] Getting gnubg to use all available cores, Louis Zulli, 2009/08/05
- [Bug-gnubg] Re: Getting gnubg to use all available cores, Michael Petch, 2009/08/05
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Getting gnubg to use all available cores, Michael Petch, 2009/08/05
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Getting gnubg to use all available cores, Zulli, Louis P, 2009/08/05
- [Bug-gnubg] Re: Getting gnubg to use all available cores, Louis Zulli, 2009/08/06
- RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Getting gnubg to use all available cores,
Ingo Macherius <=
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Getting gnubg to use all available cores, Louis Zulli, 2009/08/06
- RE: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Getting gnubg to use all available cores, Ingo Macherius, 2009/08/06
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Getting gnubg to use all available cores, Michael Petch, 2009/08/07
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Getting gnubg to use all available cores, Christian Anthon, 2009/08/07
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Getting gnubg to use all available cores, Michael Petch, 2009/08/07
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: Getting gnubg to use all available cores, Louis Zulli, 2009/08/07
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: gnubg bug? Baseline Information, Christian Anthon, 2009/08/07
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: gnubg bug? Baseline Information, Christian Anthon, 2009/08/08
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: gnubg bug? Baseline Information, Philippe Michel, 2009/08/08
- Re: [Bug-gnubg] Re: gnubg bug? Baseline Information, Michael Petch, 2009/08/08