Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: How make Fritz execute brute force search?

Author: leonid

Date: 18:35:17 07/27/00

Go up one level in this thread

On July 27, 2000 at 15:02:30, Tom Kerrigan wrote:

>On July 26, 2000 at 21:16:53, leonid wrote:
>>On July 26, 2000 at 20:45:42, Tom Kerrigan wrote:
>>>On July 26, 2000 at 19:26:03, leonid wrote:
>>>>On July 26, 2000 at 18:42:19, Tom Kerrigan wrote:
>>>>>On July 26, 2000 at 18:22:47, leonid wrote:
>>>>>>On July 26, 2000 at 17:26:01, Tom Kerrigan wrote:
>>>>>>>On July 26, 2000 at 16:59:35, leonid wrote:
>>>>>>>>On July 26, 2000 at 13:40:32, Tom Kerrigan wrote:
>>>>>>>>>On July 26, 2000 at 09:18:41, leonid wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>How ask Fritz execute brute force search? I have Fritz 6 but if it is possible
>>>>>>>>>>for some other version (even better DOS version), please say me.
>>>>>>>>>>Recently I went to see Fritz nodes per second performance. Very impressive! Only
>>>>>>>>>>maybe I am missing exact numbers. NPS tend to grow when search is done by brute
>>>>>>>>>>force. This is why I try to find where Fritz numbers stays in real. But Fritz,
>>>>>>>>>>in dispite of its performance, is not exactly open minded piece of software.
>>>>>>>>>>Even its NPS I was able to see only through my Hiarcs 7.32 program.
>>>>>>>>>>Thanks in advance,
>>>>>>>>>My search is selective only because of null-move. I believe this is also the
>>>>>>>>>case with Fritz.
>>>>>>>>>With null move on, my program searches 634k NPS. (BK, short searches)
>>>>>>>>On what hardware do you have 634k? I was very impressed with Fritz numbers only
>>>>>>>>because they were between 220 and 320k on AMD 400Mhz. Your numbers are almost
>>>>>>>>twice as fast.
>>>>>>>Pentium III/800. On a K-6/400 I figure I'd get 350k NPS or so. And that's for BK
>>>>>>>positions; if I did a 5 second run of WAC, I'd get 780k NPS or so.
>>>>>>If I am not missing there something, your numbers are better that the Fritz
>>>>>>have. If you could someday check at what speed Fritz 6 goes on your hardware and
>>>>>>send me the numbers (best with some concret position), it will be very nice. Or
>>>>>>just put them here. If you numbers are so good, like I see them, you should be
>>>>>>really proud to say them in public.
>>>>>Sure, I'm proud of the NPS, but at the moment my evaluation function is so weak
>>>>>that the program isn't competitive with even the stronger amateur programs.
>>>>Tom, anyway, if you will find few moments, send me, at least, one concret
>>>>position with Fritz 6 NPS and yours. It will say me what exactly are those
>>>>numbers. Your sound to me too enigmatic, since they are so good. And if you have
>>>>them right now, rest is nothing but question of time.
>>>I don't own Fritz 6, or any other chess program for that matter.
>>>I write my own; why should I want anybody else's? ;)
>>To compare. To verify your code as well.
>I don't see how another chess program could be used to verify my code.
>And I prefer not to compare my program to others; right now I'm just
>concentrating on making it play good chess. (Of course, it's my idea of "good
>chess" which is awful, but I'm doing the best I can. :)

It is nice that you do like you do, but I bought my programs by curiosity and
necessity. Expected that everybody else do the same. When I wrote my basic move
generator it was important for me to kill all its bugs, and this I could do only
by solving inevitable mate positions. By having on my side few programs, I used
them for verification. If I was doubtful in result, next one was used for
confirmation. The most helpful then was Genius 2. Now the most helful and
reveling is Rebel. He is the best and  first to respond to all my questions
about impact of hash tables and so like. Hiarcs is the second one in esteem.
This one is mainly because he bring inside so many best written engin. I heard,
for instance, so much about Crafty but I tried it for the first time through


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.