Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 00:20:18 07/13/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 13, 2000 at 02:34:48, Joshua Lee wrote: >On July 13, 2000 at 01:20:50, blass uri wrote: >>On July 13, 2000 at 00:41:32, Joshua Lee wrote: >> >>>So is that like the extentions with Hiarcs?? 12/30??? if not please give an >>>example of a Ply move with extentions that would be equal to these iterations >>>whatever they are. Thankyou >> >>I guess that it is always about x/4x when in most lines Junior search more than >>x plies and less than 4x plies. >> >>Uri > >I am not following you. Hiarcs say's 12/30 for 12Ply with extentions out to 30 >moves for example. are you saying that the iterations are more extentions or no? > Were you saying for Hiarcs to be equal it would have to look at 12/40?? >i've seen 18/31 in the endgame and 10/30 and up in the middlegame . > >Another way i can ask is i know Junior is looking atleast 2.6millon pos per >second let's say it uses 3 minutes on a move. 468Million nodes ... Lets say >Hiarcs sits and thinks on a move untill it has looked at 468MN. >Would the Depth be equal to junior? it should . I'm really lost They are not commensurate at all. Hiarcs is a slow searcher and Junior is a fast searcher. Both programs use very different nomenclature for what they call a "ply." Apples and oranges. You can't count the nodes and tell how good a program is except against itself. You can't count plies either, unless they mean exactly the same thing and they never do. But I think even so plies is a better indicator of strength than nodes. Look at Diep, CS-Tal, M-Chess, Hiarcs and some of the other "low-nodecount" notions. If you tried to extrapolate their strength from their nodecounts you would think they would run screaming from TSCP.
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.