Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 04:30:27 05/05/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 05, 2004 at 03:03:15, Daniel Shawul wrote: >Hello > >Is incremental attack table slower than creating them on fly? >I have both versions working properly right now but the incremental >one further drops NPS by 30% , though InCheck and Checks are for free in this >case. Anybody have similar experience? I am sure i have made no mistake in >updating because i checked it with the known perft positions and node count is >perfect. it's eating a few % system time in diep so i really wouldn't possibly know how that could slow me down by 30%. However important is to realize where you use the attacktable. In diep i use it for move ordering, i use it in my evaluation function and i'm not using lazy eval (but even with lazy eval it would be way faster. Optimizing the code is not so easy. My move generator is optimized for incremental attacktable generation (and especially if you would use unsigned variables with it). Perhaps you should take a look at it. >best >daniel
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.