Author: Jeremiah Penery
Date: 20:39:10 04/28/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 28, 2000 at 09:41:29, Chessfun wrote: >On April 28, 2000 at 09:21:59, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: > >>On April 28, 2000 at 08:59:27, Chessfun wrote: >> >>> >>>All games on one Cel 433. >>>Ponder=on. >>>Tablebases used at 25 and longer. >>>Nunn 1 positions. >>>No opening books are loaded. >>> >>> 1 min game Fritz 6a 10.0 - 10.0 Crafty 17-10 >>> 2 min game Fritz 6a 12.0 - 8.0 Crafty 17-10 >>> 3 min game Fritz 6a 16.5 - 3.5 Crafty 17-10 >>> 5 min game Fritz 6a 16.0 - 4.0 Crafty 17-10 >>>10 min game Fritz 6a - Crafty 17-10 running >>>25 min game Fritz 6a 7.0 - 6.0 Crafty 17-10 Current score >>>60 min game Fritz 6a - Crafty 17-10 Unplayed >>>Tourney times Fritz 6a - Crafty 17-10 Unplayed >>> >>>These results seem to be all over. >> >>Since you are using one machine and ponder on, each engine gets 50% of CPU time >>and therefore you should compare these results with the ponder off results at >>half the time. 2 minutes game ponder on compared to 1 minute game ponder off, >>etc. No. Pondering doesn't just affect the time so linearly. There are a lot of factors. >>There is still the question of the CPU time being allocated properly. I wonder >>if we are proving anything like this. > > >I think ponder=on on one cpu just don't work. >IMHO that is :-) As long as both programs are getting 50% of the CPU, it's (roughly) the same as a ponder-on match on 2 machines at half the time control.
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.