Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 13:30:10 09/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 18, 2000 at 15:06:14, Uri Blass wrote: >>How will you go a long time without getting big depth? >>How will you get big depth without going a long time? > >You can get bigger depth in shorter time by using less extensions. >I understand that this is exactly what Gian did if I understand correctly the >words "tuned down extensions and razoring". Correct. I picked the extensions/pruning changes in a way they should be compatible with Dann's demands. Whether or not they are good is debateble and I'm certainly not saying they are, but I do think the analysis is valuable and means at least something. Else I wouldn't have wasted all those cpu seconds on them ;) >You can get bigger depth by using Fritz and not Hiarcs but Fritz's depth is not >the same as Hiarcs depth and the proof is that hiarcs can solve more test >positions at the same depth. Absolutely right. I stated the exact same comparisation in my discussion with Dann. Even if there is a linear relation between the two, 16 ply Hiarcs still isn't == to 16 ply Fritz. >>I suspect that any 16 ply depth will take several hours to compute at least. >>Some of the problems I posted will probably take weeks if they can be solved >at all. > >If I remember correctly the 16 plies of Fritz6a took less than 1 hour for mark >young(I guess that Fritz does more pruning). Correct. If you try some of the problems I solved on a regular Crafty it will take a LOT longer too. (hardware was PentiumII 360 for first 2 in last post, Cyrix120 for very first and very last one) -- GCP
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.