Computer Chess Club Archives




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

Author: Netcenter Chessbase

Date: 10:12:10 07/30/00

Go up one level in this thread

On July 26, 2000 at 19:45:15, leonid wrote:

>On July 26, 2000 at 18:29:36, Torstein Hall 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.

You're right
>>>>>>>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.
>>What are you talking about? Its more to a chess program than a high NPS! Even
>>when doing a brute force search. Perhaps the Fritz eval is more complex etc.
>>etc. The proof is in the the chess game it plays, not the NPS.
>If you will see all the best programs you will find that biggest part of them
>have surprisingly close NPS, leaving aside few exceptions. When you will write
>your program as amateur (and ever more on C) there are very few chances that
>your NPS will come even close to those numbers. If your NPS is actually not only
>close but even better that the best monsters numbers, you have good chance to
>reach them all later.
>I was amazed by 650K on 800Mhz with a reason. Recently I found that numbers of
>NPS for this computers should be around 2 000 000 NPS for minimax. Only around
>25% of those numbers should be really reachable when all the advanced technics
>of search is used. It give around 400K for 800Mhz Pentium. Raaching 650K is more
>that simply good performance.

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.