Author: Jeremiah Penery
Date: 08:34:45 12/10/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 10, 2002 at 10:57:40, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On December 10, 2002 at 09:08:10, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>Matt i don't know it for crafty or other crap products. Crafty as we >>see in test needs less nodes when running MT=2, > >I realize this is hard for you to do, but is it _possible_ that you can stick >to _real_ data when you post? The above is _absolute_ crap. Crafty does >_not_ "need less nodes when MT=2". In some positions, yes, but in >more positions it needs _more_. And for the average case it needs _more_. > >I don't know why you continue to post something that any person here can >refute simply by running the code. I've done it for you many times. The >above is false. Please find something _else_ to wave your hands about. It came from the original data in this thread: Crafty v18.15 White(1): bench Running benchmark. . . ...... Total nodes: 97487547 Raw nodes per second: 1160566 Total elapsed time: 84 SMP time-to-ply measurement: 7.619048 White(1): ------------------------------------- Crafty v18.15 (2 cpus) White(1): bench Running benchmark. . . ...... Total nodes: 94658095 Raw nodes per second: 1314695 Total elapsed time: 72 SMP time-to-ply measurement: 8.888889 >What is "a buggy crafty?" And what is the 13-16%? I posted _real_ data. You >post fantasy without even having access to a box? And that is fact??? You can see also that the NPS speedup in that above data is 13%.
This page took 0.02 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.