Author: William Penn
Date: 20:21:28 12/06/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 06, 2000 at 09:54:24, James T. Walker wrote: >I've been playing Chessmaster (1 Meg hash) vs Chessmaster (16/32M hash) >overnight at game/25 minutes to compare the advantage of using 16/32 meg hash >tables vice the default of 1 meg. The CM8K/16M won by 28-24 and the CM8K/32M >won by 30-22 for a combined 58-46. The same settings at Game/5 minutes produced >a win for the default CM8K of 104.5-95.5. >There is a bug in the Chessmaster which causes it to lose on time ocasionally >when the game is a draw by repetition. You have to check the "games" after all >matches and when you see a "black/white lost on time" message then you need to >check the game because it usually is a 3 time draw in which neither side claimed >the draw but one side stopped playing and it's clock ran out. >I'm also playing a match between Chessmaster vs Rebel Century 3.0 (G/1hour). >After 20 games Chessmaster is winning by 13-7. I will stop this match at 24 >games and return to Chessmaster vs Chess Tiger 13. Anyone wanting the PGN of >the Rebel games just email me. >Jim I've done many tests with different hash table sizes in CM6000, and a few with CM8000. Larger hash table sizes have more effect at longer time controls. The default 1MB hash table size is probably as good as any at fast time controls. Also I've found that the hash table size generally doesn't have a big effect, maybe on the order of a 10%-20% speedup at best. For those who need really significant speedups, then higher MHz processors are the way to get it. WP
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.