Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Correction, Sorry Re: Is the NPS tend to grow at the end of the game?

Author: leonid

Date: 20:33:35 07/23/00

Go up one level in this thread

On July 23, 2000 at 21:08:04, Eelco de Groot wrote:

>Sorry, I believe I got it wrong and hash-table hits don't count for NPS, so that
>"more transpositions" effect can't be read from the nps numbers and also the
>part of my post about Crafty's EGTBs doesn't make much sense then.
>Transpositions wouldn't show up in NPS. But if Leonid was more looking at
>differences in solution times with few or many pieces on the board and if he
>doesn't have transposition/hash tables implemented yet in his program, the
>higher number of transpositions because of the few pieces on the board would be
>a likely explanation for commercial programs being faster there.  In solution
>times at least, that is.

Just by curiosity, I went to try on Rebel and Fritz 6 (from Hiarcs 7.32) few
positions. In Rebel I was capable to see the NPS counter without any hash table
and later (same position) with big hash table. Difference was only in some 2%.
With Fritz it was more difficult and less perfect, since you can't cut its hash
100%. Anyway, with Fritz I saw the same trend. Hash (after 5 positions that I
tried) change almost in nothing NPS.


This page took 0.02 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.