Hi,
but under the given circumstances (OS X with 2 quad core Nehamlem)
shouldn't be at least 4 Cores busy? I have to admit, that I have lost
the motivation to follow the CUP-Specs, simply resignation by the
sheer number of them and my disability to remember the funny code
names or product numbering, but I would be very astonished if not all
cores on 1 CPU are treated the same from the point of memory?
On pre Nehalems BGB had no difficulties to keep 8 cores busy (although
it scales not very well beyond 4 cores. Maybe the endgame DB is the
culprit because it serializes all accesses) but I have no data about
Nehalm CPUs.
ciao
Frank
_______________________________________________
Bug-gnubg mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
