Author: scott farrell
Date: 03:41:46 11/14/03
Go up one level in this thread
On November 14, 2003 at 01:28:24, Peter Kappler wrote: >On November 13, 2003 at 18:44:55, scott farrell wrote: > >>Peter, >> >>I never noticed you were java before. >> >>Chompster is bitboard, what are you using? >> > >Nothing fancy. No bitboards, no 0x88, just a simple 10x10 board. >I might throw it all away and start over soon. > > >>I am very interested in things like your NPS, I get about 100K minimum in middle >>game where lazyeval doesnt gain much, about 200K when lazyeval is at about 60%, >>and tops out at about 300-400Knps in the end game. >> > >Grok averages around 250knps in the middlegame on an Athlon 1400. You >didn't list your hardware, so I'm not sure how we compare. wow, that is much faster than mine. I have a 2500xp Barton, clocked to 3200, and average probably 150Knps in the mid game. That's about 2.25 times faster than chompster ... that would be nearly 600Knps on my hardware.... mmmm .... I am not very impressed with myself. If I had 600Knps, I could take on any engine .... I can't keep using the - "its java - its slower" excuse. Maybe its bitboards, maybe its because I generate all moves first, maybe my eval is heavy, maybe I get better move ordering ... or .... maybe I have sloppy code. I just worked out I'll be Overseas on holidays skiing at Whistler Canada when cct6 is on. I might need to lean on a few people to make sure chompster enters the comp. Is grok online much of the time? I'd love to play against it, not to compete, but to see differences. Are you getting a faster CPU for CCT6? I can lend you space on a athlon 2.4 Ghz machine for cct6 if you like, and give you remote access accross the web etc. I am keen on egtb code, and to share anything I have, too bad we dont have the same board representation. Scott > > >>I dont have SEE, but a bit smarter than plain MVV/LVA (as previously discussed). >> >>The only java specific departure I have had was my hashtables, I dont use on >>array of object type HashEntry - it was too wasteful with memory, and had to use >>several arrays of primitives. Did you have to do this? >> > >Yep, same decision here. :) > > >>I noticed we finsihed tied in CCT5. Are you entering CCT6? I had a forfeit in >>CCT5 against an engine that was easy to beat - I fell asleep (it was like 4am in >>Sydney). Not that I might have done any better, because the forfeit allowed the >>last few games to be easier. >> > >Yep, I'm planning to play in CCT6. CCT5 was a bit of a disappointment. I felt >like Grok should have done better. I blame it all on my opening book. ;) > > >>Do you have any code for EGTB you can lend? I use web services accross the web. >> >>sfarrell@icconsulting.com.au (in case you want to take this offline) >>Scott > >I don't mind sharing this code. I'll email some stuff to you this weekend. > >-Peter
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.