Author: Uri Blass
Date: 07:02:37 11/12/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 12, 2000 at 07:08:19, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >On November 12, 2000 at 06:52:04, Uri Blass wrote: > >>I believe that some programs have clearly diminishing return in plies when other >>programs do not suffer significantly from this problem. > >A quick and dirty way to comapre engines in this regard is checking in the SSDF >list the increase in rating points when running on P90, P200MMX and AMD 450. >Some programs have been tested with the 3 platforms, some others with 2. > >A case in point would be Hiarcs 7.32, relatively stronger on P200MMX than on the >AMD 450. It is also known that H732 is comparatively better at blitz than at >40:2, for the same reason. It is also known that hiarcs earns less speed from the AMD450 relative to most programs. It is also known that Hiarcs7.32 has a learning bug of retaining the hash tables so I cannot learn from the difference in rating in the ssdf about Hiarcs7.32. > >>I suggest the following experiment to check it. >> >>1)Give chess programs 5 hours to calculate a fixed set of positions(I suggest >>the position after 20 moves of both sides from the human-machine challange when >>everyone can download the games at club kasparov). > >3rr1k1/pp1nqp1p/2pb1np1/8/3N4/PP2P2P/1BQ1NPP1/R4RK1 b - - 0 22 > >That's an "average" middlegame position. You could do your experiment with it. > >Enrique I think that one position is not enough becasue an engine may be lucky or unlucky in one position. Uri
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.