Author: Pallav Nawani
Date: 21:38:19 07/15/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 15, 2005 at 13:44:01, Uri Blass wrote: >On July 15, 2005 at 12:45:04, Pallav Nawani wrote: > >> >>>...and 40 moves in 40 minutes is too fast for reliability, IMHO, >> >>Wrong. All available data shows that for ratings, time control does not matter, >>unless it is very small. Even bullet tournaments have highly similar ratings in >>most cases. What really matters is consistent testing conditions and the number >>of games played. >> >>>especially for >>>those who use the software in correspondence chess. The 40 moves in 2 hours used >>>by SSDF is best. >> >>SSDF tests on 1 Ghz Pcs , IIRC. CEGT tests on time control of 40/40 on 2 Ghz pc. >>Therefore CEGT time control is equivalent to 1Hr20Min per 40 moves on SSDF >>hardware which is quite ok. >> >>Pallav > >No > >SSDF test on 1.2 ghz and not on PIV that is slow for chess. >CEGT test on something equivalent to 40/40 on PIV 2 ghz Okay, I stand corrected. >CEGT also test without pondering so I think that CEGT time control is equivaelnt >to something like 30 minutes/40 moves in ssdf conditions. You are overestimating the impact of pondering. Most of the time engines just ponder on wrong moves, so that time is just wasted, even though incorrect pondering will fill the hashtables with (sometimes) useful data. But savings in case of a incorrect pondering are so small they are negligible. Pallav
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.