Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 12:35:24 12/27/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 27, 2005 at 13:34:08, Stuart Cracraft wrote: >On December 27, 2005 at 04:49:51, Vasik Rajlich wrote: > >>On December 26, 2005 at 16:52:23, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >> >>>For long analysis that is, i mean if you have an engine running for say 2 days >>>on a position, will it come to another conclusion whether you use 32Mb hash or >>>2Gb hash? >>> >>>In other words will it, at that time control/analysis matter what hash size you >>>use? >> >>I vaguely remember some tests which suggest that every doubling of the hash size >>gives 5 or 6 rating points. >> >>Vas > >Yes - I recall something from Gordon Goetsch and Hans Berliner at CMU quite >some time ago that gave 2x = 8 rating points. It may have been Carl Ebeling. >I believe it was the 1970's or 1980's for that figure. And that may have been >USCF rating points instead of ELO points. > >Here is a more recent commentary from 1998 SSDF which gave 4-5 rating points >per doubling. > >http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaveral/Launchpad/2640/ssdf/1998/ssdf9804.htm > >And here: > >http://www.chessassistance.com/Articles/020_Hash_size.html > >It is no quick way to improved rating unless the table is horribly small already >of course. > >I like to size the table commeasurate with the size of searches I'm doing. Since >I don't size dynamically but statically at compile time. I am sure most size >dynamically at compile time for flexibility. I haven't done this yet. I think that Shredder benefits from large hash more than other programs. I have seen dramatic differences in solution times (much faster) with big hash (512 MB or larger) compared to smaller hash sizes.
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.