Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 07:10:26 10/01/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 01, 2003 at 10:03:26, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On October 01, 2003 at 07:45:48, Joachim Rang wrote: > >>On October 01, 2003 at 07:31:53, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>On October 01, 2003 at 07:24:24, Joachim Rang wrote: >>> >>>>On September 30, 2003 at 19:33:30, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>> >>>>>On September 30, 2003 at 19:30:30, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On September 30, 2003 at 19:27:38, Peter Collins wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On September 30, 2003 at 19:22:26, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On September 30, 2003 at 19:14:02, Peter Collins wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>My apologies for the format (from memory) of the position I'd like to analyse, >>>>>>>>>but I am at a terminal outside of where I can access the gamescore: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Black to make his 29th move: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>3q2k1 >>>>>>>>>5p1p >>>>>>>>>1n2nbpB >>>>>>>>>1P1p4 >>>>>>>>>1Qp3P1 >>>>>>>>>7P >>>>>>>>>1P3PK1 >>>>>>>>>1B2R3 >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>Sorry if this is the wrong forum, I'm new here. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>A friend of mine played black against Jeremy Silman..he only looked at about a >>>>>>>>>trillion nodes on slower machines... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>[D]3q2k1/5p1p/1n2nbpB/1P1p4/1Qp3P1/7P/1P3PK1/1B2R3 b - - >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Thanks Dan, indeed, this is the correct position. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I think the one of the best variation so far goes... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>29...d4 30.Be4 d3 31.Qd2 g5 32.h4 gxh4 and from here I am using a 2800Barton, >>>>>>>1.5MB Ram to analyse it. >>>>>> >>>>>>1.5 GB, I suppose. >>>>>> >>>>>>Do you have a preference for what program to analyze with? >>>>>> >>>>>>Many programs will never make it to 24 ply [*] >>>>>> >>>>>>[*] By 'never' I mean that not in several years of continuous time. >>>>> >>>>>at a 486 sure :) >>>>> >>>>>But how about 500 processors? >>>>> >>>>>2 hours or so? >>>> >>>> >>>>Diep will never make it to play 24 on your famous 500 CPU-Box. >>>> >>>>regards Joachim >>> >>>junior gets dual 21 ply, shredder searched at a dual P4 in ict3 like 19 in a >>>more complex position than this against diep. >>> >>>i'm not really seeing the problem when i use similar definitions of a ply like >>>them. >>> >>>Best regards, >>>Vincent >> >> >>didn't you wrote that you no longer do stupid pruning? Without extensive pruning >>no program will get 24 plies even at a 500-CPU-Machine. >> >>I don't know your program, but do you actually believe that Diep would reach a >>depth of 24 in two or three hours? >> >>regards Joachim > >i'm using R=3 nullmove. there is no limit on the number of plies you can search >with nullmove. if i limit the extensions, sure 24 ply is not a major problem >when all the search lines end in for example endgame with little possibilities. > >Opening is really the worst case position there. > >a well tuned evaluation function for this position should have no problems >reaching 24 after a couple of hours 500 cpu. > >you have no idea what you're talking about. how many times in your life have you >run with a hashtable of sizes up to 250GB having 512GB ram? compare it with this. how many thousands of years would it take your current pc to generate a 10 TB database? Well at such machines with 512GB ram and the total system having terabytes of striped harddisks i/o and 1 TB bandwidth over the entire machine (0.5 at the 512 processor partition obviously) you talk about other dimensions. Even with a cleaned hashtable after 10 minutes already speedup is 37.3% at 130 cpu's. that gets better and better simply each ply because the BRANCHING FACTOR is better at such machines at big depths. So it is in short exponential better than a PC. If i search 5 ply deeper than normal diep, that in theory would be: 3.0^5 = 243 speedup out of 500 processors. Impossible some will say. Well when you give 1 processor 200GB hashtables in total you sure won't find a 243 speedup. However with so many million nodes a second you speak about other dimensions than a PC can handle. I can store *every* node into hashtable. Without that no speedup at all at the machine. But doing that the speedup is magnificent! So the real power shows at long level analysis! Best regards, Vincent
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.