1. This forum section is a read-only archive which contains old newsgroup posts. If you wish to post a query, please do so in one of our main forum sections (here). This way you will get a faster, better response from the members on Motherboard Point.

Need help on mobile phone chess playing software and hardware:comparing apples to oranges--how stron

Discussion in 'Embedded' started by RayLopez99, Apr 23, 2011.

  1. RayLopez99

    RayLopez99 Guest

    rec.games.chess.computer,rec.games.chess.misc,comp.arch.embedded,alt.comp.hardware.pc-
    homebuilt


    Can anybody help me figure out how fast (what Elo rating) modern cell
    phone and mobile phone hardware play chess? Go to the SSDF rating
    list http://ssdf.bosjo.net/list.htm and note that

    38 Pocket Shredder Ipaq 114 624 MHz 2682 65 -59 138 67% 2557
    39 Deep Sjeng 1.5a 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2671 31 -31 493 52% 2659
    40 CEBoard Fruit 2.3.1 XScale 400 400 MHz 2642 59 -57 149 59% 2580

    Which shows that an XScale 400Mhz machine plays like a Pentium IV
    class machine from around 2003. I think XScale is used in some older
    (few years ago) Nokia cell phones.

    But what about more modern cell phone hardware, like the ones that use
    Qualcomm's SnapDraggon chip?

    From what I can tell, the following rule of thumb is correct.

    Snapdragon (single core) and Marvell's Armada 500/600, both based on
    ARMv7 implementations, are roughly equal to Intel's Atom. Intel's
    Atom is roughly equal to a 2003-2004 vintage Celeron. So using SSDF
    you can do the math and see what a mobile phone playing software chess
    program like Pocket Fritz can do in a cell phone employing these
    chips. Roughly the programs would have an Elo on the SSDF list of a
    little above 2660 Elo on the SSDF list, probably close to 2700 to 2750
    (dual core Snapdragon cell phones, which come out in late 2011 to
    2012, would be at the upper limit).

    But does anybody have more precise figures? Perhaps based on the
    number of chess nodes searched per second for various chips embedded
    in mobile PDAs and cell phones?

    RL

    From the net...

    Anybody

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Atom

    Embedded processors based on the ARM version 7 instruction set
    architecture (such as TI's OMAP 3 series and Freescale's i.MX51 based
    on the Cortex-A8 processor, or the Qualcomm Snapdragon and Marvell
    Armada 500/600 based on custom ARMv7 implementations) offer similar
    performance to the low end Atom chipsets[dubious – discuss] but at
    roughly one quarter the power consumption, and (like most ARM systems)
    as a single integrated system on a chip, rather than a two chip
    solution like the current Atom line. Although the next-generation Atom
    codenamed "Pineview" should greatly increase its competitiveness in
    performance/watt, ARM plans to counter the threat with the multi-core
    capable Cortex-A9 processor as used in Nvidia's Tegra 2, T.I.'s OMAP 4
    series, and Qualcomm's next-generation Snapdragon series, among
    others.

    --

    Mobile Chipsets: WTF Are Atom, Tegra and Snapdragon?

    Dan Nosowitz — Low-power processors aren't just for netbooks: These
    computers-on-a-chip are going to be powering our smartphones and other
    diminutive gadgets in the forseeable future. So what's the difference
    between the Atoms, Snapdragons and Tegras of the world?

    Intel Atom
    The current reigning king of low-cost, low-power processors, Intel's
    Atom flat-out dominates the netbook market. Its single- and dual-core
    processors are also some of the most powerful on our list, despite
    having abilities roughly equal to, in Intel's own terms, a 2003-2004
    vintage Celeron. Based on the x86 architecture, the Atom is capable of
    running full versions of Windows XP, Vista (though not all that well),
    and 7, as well as modern Linux distros and even Hackintosh. While it
    requires far less power than a full-power chip, it's still more power-
    hungry than the ARM-based processors on our list, requiring about 2
    watts on average. That's why netbook battery life isn't all that much
    longer than that of a normal laptop.

    You can find the Atom in just about every netbook, including those
    from HP, Dell, Asus, Acer, Sony, Toshiba, MSI, and, well, everyone
    else. The 1.6GHz chip is the most popular at the moment, but Intel is
    definitely going to keep improving and upgrading the Atom line.
    However, you're unlikely to catch an Atom in a handset; it's low-
    power, yes, but low-power for a notebook. Battery life on an Atom
    handset would be pretty atrocious, which is why Intel's sticking to
    netbooks for now.

    Qualcomm Snapdragon
    Based on ARM, which is a 32-bit processor architecture that powers
    just about every mobile phone (and various other peripherals, though
    never desktop computers) out there, Snapdragon isn't competing
    directly with the Intel Atom—it's not capable of running full versions
    of Windows (only Windows Mobile and Windows CE), it's incredibly
    energy-efficient (requiring less than half a watt), and is designed
    for always-on use. In other words, this is the evolution of the mobile
    computing processor. It's got great potential: Qualcomm is trumpeting
    battery life stretching past 10 hours, smooth 1080p video, support for
    GPS, 3G, and Bluetooth, and such efficiency that a Linux-based netbook
    can use Snapdragon without a fan or even a heat sink. Available in
    single core (1GHz) or dual-core (1.5GHz), it can be used in
    conjunction with Android, Linux, and various mobile OSes.

    Unfortunately, Qualcomm is still holding onto the notion that people
    want MIDs, and is championing "smartbooks," which are essentially
    smartphones with netbook bodies, like Asus's announced-then-retracted
    Eee with Android. Snapdragon's got promise, but we think that promise
    lies in super-powered handheld devices, not even more underpowered
    versions of already-underpowered netbooks.

    We're frankly not sure when we'll see Snapdragon-based devices sold in
    the US. We're sure Snapdragon will end up in smartphones at some
    point, as at least one Toshiba handset has been tentatively announced,
    but the only concrete demonstrations we've seen have been in MIDs, and
    Snapdragon themselves spend all their energy touting these
    "smartbooks." Snapdragon's Windows Mobile compatibility suggests we
    may see it roll out with Windows Mobile 7, if Tegra hasn't snapped up
    all the good handsets.

    Nvidia Tegra
    Nvidia's Tegra processor is very similar to Snapdragon—both are based
    on ARM architecture, so both are designed for even less intense
    applications than the Atom. Like Snapdragon, Tegra isn't capable of
    running desktop versions of Windows, so it's primarily targeted at
    Android and handheld OSes, especially forthcoming versions of Windows
    Mobile. What sets Tegra apart from Snapdragon is the Nvidia graphics
    pedigree: The company claims smooth 1080p video, like Snapdragon, but
    also hardware-accelerated Flash video and even respectable gaming
    (though no, you won't be able to run Crysis). They also go even
    further than Qualcomm in their battery life claim, suggesting an
    absolutely insane 30 hours of HD video.

    While Snapdragon tends to be loosely associated with Android, Tegra is
    an integral part of Microsoft's plan for next-generation Windows
    Mobile devices. Instead of focusing on "smartbooks" and MIDs, which we
    think are part of a dead-end category, Tegra's commitment to
    pocketable handhelds could spell success. We've seen proof-of-concept
    demonstrations of Tegra already, but its real commercial debut will
    come with Windows Mobile 7—and if WM7 doesn't suck, Tegra could take
    off.

    Others
    We haven't included certain other processors, especially VIA's Nano,
    due to intent: The Nano requires lower power than full-scale
    processors, but at 25 watts, it's not even really in the same league
    as Atom, let alone Snapdragon or Tegra. The VIA Nano is really
    targeted at non-portable green technology, and looks like it'll do a
    good job—it outperformed Atom in Ars Technica's excellent test, and
    stands up to moderate use with ease. AMD's Puma (Turion X2) is in a
    similar boat: It's certainly markedly more energy-efficient than AMD's
    other offerings, but as it's targeted at laptops (not netbooks) with a
    screen size greater than 12-inches, it's not quite right for our list
    here.

    These low-power processors aren't just, as we so often think, crappier
    versions of "real" processors. They've got uses far beyond netbooks,
    especially in the near future as the gap between netbooks and
    smartphones narrows.

    Still something you still wanna know? Send any questions about why
    your iPhone can't play Crysis, how to tie a bow tie, or anything else
    to tips at gizmodo.com, with "Giz Explains" in the subject line.
     
    RayLopez99, Apr 23, 2011
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. RayLopez99

    linnix Guest

    Why not compare it to XScale (ARM)? However, memory types and clock
    rate would make a different.
    This is probably old news, very old news. The LG VS740 is 600MHz
    snapdragon class cpu + dsp core. Newer versions are 1GHz.
     
    linnix, Apr 23, 2011
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. RayLopez99

    raylopez99 Guest

    Yes, a comparison with ARM is in order, and has been done in some old
    testing sites for chess. I reproduce below some data from a few years
    ago.

    I am now interested in the A4 chip by the iPhone, which is about 35%
    faster than first generation SnapDragon chips. I think the iPhone 4
    playing chess would be about 2700, since it's about twice as fast as
    earlier generations, and for every doubling of speed you gain 100 Elo
    points, and from the below data the earlier PDAs had about 2600 Elo
    performance (see 2606 Elo below--note that inferior software will push
    this number down on the same hardware, so we are talking about the
    optimal, best software for any given hardware), so it would rate 2700
    Elo on the SSDF scale, and indeed if you Google HIRACS, a chess
    software company that writes code for the iPhone, that is exactly what
    they claim on their website for the latest iPhone hardware. So the
    SnapDragon would be roughly about the same (35% is not that big a
    deal) or around 2675 Elo).

    In conclusion, so far, the evidence points that Snapdragon (Android)
    is roughly the same as a A4 chip (iPhone) for chess playing (again, on
    optimal, best practices chess playing software) and roughly they play
    about twice as fast as the XScale platforms, and roughly equal in
    chess performance a Pentium IV (Athlon, most likely late 1990s first
    generation but perhaps a Thunderbird maybe, from around 2002) in
    performance, or perhaps as an upper bound (stretching it) a modern
    Intel Atom (though I'm sure Intel would dispute that). Roughly these
    modern chips play at the 2650 to 2700 Elo level on the SSDF scale.

    The next generation A4 and Snapdragon will be multiple core, but other
    than multitasking, unless the chess software is rewritten to take
    advantage of multiple cores, I'm not sure if that will make the chips
    that much stronger for chess. But if the feature size is the same for
    the A4 (and Googling it I see that the newer A5 will be the same 45 nm
    size as the A4) I don't think the A5 (next generation A4) will be
    faster at chess--of course being bigger it will "do more" and be a
    better chip for multitasking for mobile phone feature purposes, but
    that's beside the point for this discussion.

    Any other insights appreciated.

    RL

    Palm/Pocket PC Software PDA Estimated SSDF Elo Rating based on 288
    games
    Palm Chess Hiarcs 9.46 Palm Tungsten T3 XScale 400Mhz 2606
    Pocket Fritz 2.0 IPAQ XScale 400Mhz 2511
    Palm Chess Genius 2.1 Palm Tungsten T3 XScale 400Mhz 2394
    Pocket Grandmaster IPAQ XScale 400Mhz 2381
    Palm Chess Tiger 15.1 Palm Tungsten T3 XScale 400Mhz 2297
     
    raylopez99, Apr 24, 2011
    #3
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.