Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 13:18:04 04/15/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 15, 2000 at 15:56:18, Borges wrote:
>On April 15, 2000 at 12:44:40, Christophe Theron wrote:
> Hi Christophe!
> I ran an account in ICC, and was able to get more than 3000 points, with no
>special hardware. The interesting is that it rans with default settings. It
>appers no coincidence that when i put NSEW=1 and MoreSel=1 tiger became weak
>(IMHO). The hashtable I have to set up with 32M in 3 0 games and 64M in 5 0
>games, less than this will result in odd endgames, when tiger sometimes put away
>a victory.
You should really check this carefully. Using 32Mb in 3 0 games kills the
playing strength, I'm sure about this.
Christophe
> I shouldnt said that, perhaps i will lose some points :-). But with
>this settings in icc chess tiger does very well! A book editor will help also.
> Borges (not jorge luis)
>
>>On April 15, 2000 at 08:39:56, Laurence Chen wrote:
>>
>>>Hi all,
>>> I've ran some blitz games between Junior6a and Rebel Tiger 12e, and Hiarcs
>>>7.32 and Rebel Tiger 12e, and I was surprised the results. I'm using two
>>>identical computers, Pentium III 600E, autoplayer 232, blitz games at 5 min. + 3
>>>secs. Junior and Hiarcs were using Fritz 5.32 opening book, and Rebel Tiger its
>>>default book with NSEW=1, MoreSel=1. In the match where all engines were using
>>>16 MB of Ram for hashtables, Rebel Tiger got trounced very badly, against Junior
>>>6a, it lost to a score of 15.5-34.5, against Hiarcs 7.32, it lost to a score of
>>>13-37. Jim Walker suggested that I use 8 MB of RAM instead, so I ran another
>>>match of Rebel Tiger against Hiarcs 7.32, both engines using 8 MB of RAM, and
>>>now Rebel Tiger lost to a score of 21-29. I'm sure there are dupes, but that's
>>>Rebel Tiger fault for having a bug in the learning book. Yes, I downloaded the
>>>patch for learning from Rebel's website, and it did not fix the problem. This
>>>clearly shows that giving more hashtable for Rebel Tiger in this time control is
>>>very bad. The engine performance goes down a lot. So this raises the question,
>>>what is the optimal hashtable for different engines at different time controls?
>>>One cannot assume that 8 Mb of RAM for Hiarcs is better, I will later on run
>>>another 50 games match with Hiarcs having 16 MB of RAM, and Rebel Tiger 8 MB of
>>>RAM. A lot of us think that more RAM increases the strength of a chess engine.
>>>From this little experiment, it clearly shows that the opposite is true. I
>>>believe that there must be an optimal hashtable size where the engine will
>>>perform its best when given the proper hashtable size for a specific time
>>>control. How would one figure this out? I think that test suites cannot
>>>provide a proper answer to this question, any ideas.
>>>Laurence
>>
>>
>>I have already answered this question several times, at least regarding
>>Rebel-Tiger.
>>
>>At fast time controls, giving too much hash tables kills the program, because of
>>the time needed to update them at the beginning of each search.
>>
>>If you give too much hash tables, Tiger will spend a significant amount of time
>>before each move in order to update the informations stored in the hash table.
>>Depending on the computer's speed, it can be 20% of the thinking time in the
>>opening phase, to 80% of the thinking time in the endgame.
>>
>>In this case, the additional amount of hash table does not speed up the engine.
>>It actually slows it down badly.
>>
>>In the next release of Rebel-Tiger, the engine will be equipped with an
>>automatic hash table size setting algorithm, which will choose the best amount
>>of hash table depending on the computer you are using and the time controls of
>>the game.
>>
>>Until that, you might consider giving the engine less hash tables if you play at
>>fast time controls in order to optimize its performances.
>>
>>
>>
>> Christophe
This page took 0.01 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.