Author: leonid
Date: 20:33:35 07/23/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 23, 2000 at 21:08:04, Eelco de Groot wrote: >Sorry, I believe I got it wrong and hash-table hits don't count for NPS, so that >"more transpositions" effect can't be read from the nps numbers and also the >part of my post about Crafty's EGTBs doesn't make much sense then. >Transpositions wouldn't show up in NPS. But if Leonid was more looking at >differences in solution times with few or many pieces on the board and if he >doesn't have transposition/hash tables implemented yet in his program, the >higher number of transpositions because of the few pieces on the board would be >a likely explanation for commercial programs being faster there. In solution >times at least, that is. > >Eelco Just by curiosity, I went to try on Rebel and Fritz 6 (from Hiarcs 7.32) few positions. In Rebel I was capable to see the NPS counter without any hash table and later (same position) with big hash table. Difference was only in some 2%. With Fritz it was more difficult and less perfect, since you can't cut its hash 100%. Anyway, with Fritz I saw the same trend. Hash (after 5 positions that I tried) change almost in nothing NPS. Leonid.
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.