Author: Andrew Dados
Date: 10:49:56 09/25/00
Go up one level in this thread
On September 25, 2000 at 13:13:25, Christophe Theron wrote: >On September 25, 2000 at 01:38:15, Jouni Uski wrote: > >>In my moderate AMD K6-2 450Mhz and 50 MB hash it exceeds easily 1000knps in >>tactical positions and sometimes goes over 1300knps. Of course I know this means >>almost nothing to playing strength, but still it's unbelievable. I wonder can >>it be true nps value or has Michael B. his own node definition... >> >>Jouni > > > >It's not that unbelievable. I can easily reach this speed with Chess Tiger if I >turn off some time consuming selective algorithms and some evaluation terms. > >One very efficient thing to get a high NPS is the following: when you are in >check, generate all the pseudo legal moves, try them one by one until you get a >legal escape from check. The smart way is to write a generation routine that >generates only the truly legal moves. It is more efficient, but it has a smaller >NPS. :) > >A similar idea is to generate all the moves in QSearch, try them one by one and >prune away non-capture moves. It is less efficient than generating only the >captures, but I guess I could get a 2M NPS if I did this. > >NPS has clearly nothing to do with playing strength. Kasparov's NPS sucks. > > :)) Also quite efficient is counting pruned nodes (well.. I decided to prune them, so I 'visited' them..). Most efficient is however Nodes+=10 instead of traditional increment by one approach...:) -Andrew- > > Christophe
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.