Author: Roy Eassa
Date: 13:38:00 03/07/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 07, 2002 at 16:21:01, John Merlino wrote: >On March 07, 2002 at 15:38:59, Roy Eassa wrote: > >>On March 07, 2002 at 14:58:10, John Merlino wrote: >> >>>As for the manual (actually, you mean the FAQ), all it explains is that chess >>>engines will try to get as much cpu speed as Windows will give them; EVERY >>>decent chess engine does this, not just The King. If you are TRULY concerned >>>about engines taking more than their share of the CPU, then just run comp vs. >>>comp games with ponder off. >> >> >>Are you saying that, if a $20 program hogs the CPU more than other competing >>programs, the user should resolve the problem by running out and spending $1000 >>for a second computer? > >Not at all. I said that if you are concerned about unequal distribution/usage of >the CPU (whether your concerns are valid or not), then just run comp vs. comp >games with ponder off. That solves the problem and puts both engines on >identical footing (assuming that both engines use a negligible amount of the CPU >when idle). > >Nor am I agreeing with the accusation that The King "hogs the CPU". Nobody has >conclusively shown this to be the case. > >jm I shouldn't have used the term "hogs the CPU" as that has a negative implication (sorry). How about, "uses substantially more CPU time than other chess programs," or something like that? It's not a BAD thing, and you're right -- it may not even be true. But if it IS true, I hope there would be a cheaper way to resolve it in engine-engine matches than having to purchase an entire additional computer! People are clever beasts and I have a strong feeling that this issue, if true, can be resolved a different way.
This page took 0 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.