Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: your comments on hash

Author: J. Wesley Cleveland

Date: 09:37:04 11/14/00

Go up one level in this thread


On November 14, 2000 at 02:25:31, K. Burcham wrote:

>i have seen the effects of changing hash values in a benchtest. i saw where
>stefan used maybe three sticks of 256 to get 768 megs of ram for shredder, when
>he won the world. i also see where sarah is using 48 megs hash with a 900
>t-bird. with these large amounts of ram, what are some of these guys setting
>their hash values at.   is there some sort of standard, for example, say for
>this mhz at this time control, with this amount of nodes being searched, then we
>should use this hash setting. do you think with the new processors that will
>search 1000-1500 kns, that these will take more hash then is usually
>recommended. how should i look at this setting for optimum performance? maybe if
>i play a 3/0,  32 megs would be enough with 800 kns. but on long time controls,
>30 minute game or longer, it almost seems that you cant have too much ram. is
>there a point where increasing hash does not decrease kns? but i have read where
>alot of you guys dont use windows. i use 98se.  also if some of you are using
>windows 98se, could you tell me how you are managing your virtual memory.
>
>thanks

A rough estimate is:

Allow two hash table entries for every node searched on an average move.



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.