Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 10:43:41 12/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On December 17, 2000 at 14:24:13, Frank Quisinsky wrote: I don't know how Frans implemented his parallellism, but it doesn't sound like a good idea to run it parallel with another engine playing against it, unless the other program runs on a different computer. With 2 processors running 3 program threads/processes means that one process in turn will not get system time and will get blocked. In about 50% of the total time that will be one of the parallel engines. If a parallel engine gets blocked very likely real soon locks inside the engine will prevent the other process from getting further too. Running a processor dual means you definitely NEED 2 free cpu's (free of work load) otherwise the parallellism works against you. If you run diep dual on a single cpu for example then the first 30 seconds it will search like a couple of hundreds of nodes. Only when the locks are near the root and the search depth is huge, then the problem gets a lot smaller as both can search without locking each other too much. >Hi, >in the next 3 months I play with 5 new engines in my CCE tourney >(biggest computer chess tourney). > >01. Tourney "B": WB LambChop 10.x (very strong, I think 2.425 - 2.525 ELO). >02. Tourney "B": WB Insomniac 0.69a (older version with 2.450 - 2.475 ELO). >03. Tourney "A": CB The Crazy Bishop (I believe 2.375 - 2.425 ELO). >04. Tourney "A": CB Nimzo 8 (I believe 20 - 40 ELO stronger as Nimzo 7-32). >05. Tourney "A": CB DeepFritz (I believe 20 - 40 ELO stronger as Fritz 6a). > >We will see ... >New results daily ! > >Dual Pentium III 733 MHz, Ponder = on, 64 MB Hash-Tables, 40 moves in 40 >minutes, 4-piece nalimov TBs with 4 MB cache ! > >More information on my webpage ! >http://amateurschach.in-trier.de > >Have a nice day ! > >Best >Frank
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.