Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 17:48:18 11/10/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 10, 2000 at 19:20:09, Peter Skinner wrote: >>That is the kind of thing I would worry about, if Crafty was doing it. Crafty >>is presently not particularly fast. I am pretty sure that I could make it at >>least 2x faster, if I was ready to cast a lot of things into stone, and _really_ >>muck up the readability/understandability of the source. > >I actually find the Crafty 17.14 version very slow, and results are proving that >possibly something might be wrong. In a match vs RoboElvis(C) on FICS using >Crafty 17.14 on a dual PII 300, vs my Gambit Tiger on a PIII 500, I scored >81W-15L-30D, this is rare, as usually Roboelvis destroys me. > >When he uses Crafty 17.13, the win% is lower, and way more draws. > >>And that incurs a penalty I don't mind, because I can pick up that factor of two >>with the right hardware... > >Crafty used to be a brute. What is the explanation as to why it has fallen >behind so far? Not to say really far, but it seems to be having more problems >with commercial programs than before. 17.14 is not appreciably slower than 17.13... The benchmark positions take longer, but that is very common. The eval changes simply change the shape of the tree it searches... Some positions are faster, some are slower. The endgame positions in the benchmark suite take more nodes to search, with the new endgame stuff. As far as win/lose/draw differences, there should be little difference other than 17.14 should recognize new classes of won/lost endings that 17.13 would not understand...
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.