Author: Uri Blass
Date: 03:30:54 01/11/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 11, 2006 at 05:12:34, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >On January 10, 2006 at 06:40:43, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On January 10, 2006 at 04:43:57, Vasik Rajlich wrote: >> >>>On January 09, 2006 at 21:41:17, Arnon Yogev wrote: >>> >>>>On January 09, 2006 at 19:38:59, robert flesher wrote: >>>> >>>>>why not 64 bit providers a huge speed gain from what I have read. Even if its >>>>>only 30-50 elo that is alot. An extra ply here or there can spell death. I >>>>>prefer to see testing under fair conditions. >>>> >>>> >>>>I don't think that this particular type of hardware advantage can cause such a >>>>difference in results. >>>>Do you honstly think that the 32 bit version would score below 50% just because >>>>of it? hard to believe.. >>>> >>>>For example, take a look at the latest CEGT results : >>>> >>>>Rybka 1.0 Beta 32-bit Vs. Deep Shredder 9 2CPU 512MB >>>>== >>>>104 + 50 = 25 - 29 >>>>! >>>> >>>>The barely 80 kn/s fish slaughters the double CPU'ed kn/s monster. >>>> >>>>Hiarcs versus the same opponent scores + 16 = 15 - 19 which is pretty decent, >>>>but not slightly close to Rybka's result. >>>> >>>>From my personal exeperience I can tell you that while playing online for the >>>>first time i could pass the 2600+ rank with my antique P4 1.8 playing against >>>>_much_ faster machines. >>>>all this thanks to Rybka. before that era I could barely pass the 2450 rate with >>>>any other engine.. Rybka just brought back all the fun =). >>>> >>>>I don't ask Hiarcs to win every match it set against, But I think that we could >>>>except more from a commercial release .. Surely just to give some more >>>>competition. (I'm not speaking just about Rybka, so spare the "it was not >>>>available at the time"..) >>>> >>>>AY. >>>> >>>>PS if the setting is really better than default, Why on earth it was not >>>>discovered before the release ? I remember enrico said that they ran more than >>>>1000 long games for the beta version before the release, so I mean, none of the >>>>beta-testers could have just think about changing some parameters? that's their >>>>jobs and why they are betatesters anyway.. >>> >>>Enrico's explanation is pretty good. I want to add three things: >>> >>>1) 60% speedup (as you get going from 32-bit Rybka to 64-bit Rybka) gives around >>>30 rating points. >> >>I think that it is dependent on the time control. >> >>http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/eloblitzall.html >> >>I see bigger difference at blitz and I think that there is also a bigger >>difference for weaker programs than rybka. >> >>I guess that the advantage is bigger when the engine does more mistakes. >>It is also possible that the 30 elo is misleading because it is harder to >>improve result against weak opponents and the difference is going to be bigger >>when the opponents becomes stronger. >> >>Unfortunately no opponent in the CEGT list is stronger than Rybka and rybka >>plays only against weaker opponents(it is possible to change the situation by >>giving the opponents more time and have CEGT rating for things like Fruit2.2*3 >>when you give Fruit2.2 120 minutes against 40 minutes of other opponents) but >>unfortunately I do not expect it to happen). >> >>Uri > >Interesting. Indeed, I took a look, and found the following: > >Blitz, Rybka 64 bit vs 32 bit: 58 ELO >40/40, Rybka 64 bit vs 32 bit: 31 ELO >Blitz, Shredder 9 2 CPU vs Shredder 9 1 CPU: 61 ELO >40/40, Shredder 9 2 CPU vs Shredder 9 1 CPU: 51 ELO > >The number which is out of line with the others is the first one, not sure why >it's so high. > >Also, some small evidence overall for diminishing returns. > >Vas If you take weaker programs you can find bigger improvements from 64 bits 2 cpu. Not enough games were played but it seems to be 100-200 elo improvement from the combination of 2 cpu and 64 bits. I am not sure if it is diminishing returns or that the difference for programs in the top of the list is underrated. 14 Zappa 1.1 64-bit 2CPU 512MB 2754 94 Zappa 1.1 2607 30 Deep Sjeng 1.6 2CPU 512MB 2708 92 Deep Sjeng 1.6 1CPU 2608 26 Crafty Cito 1.4.2 64/bit 2CPU 2715 134 Crafty Cito 1.2-1.4.1 2533(best Crafty 1 cpu) 146 Crafty Cito 1.4.2 2514 (not enough games but I guess no big difference to 1.2-1.4.1) Uri
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.