Author: Ulrich Tuerke
Date: 03:47:16 01/09/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 09, 2001 at 06:18:29, Steffen Jakob wrote: >On January 09, 2001 at 05:36:26, Ulrich Tuerke wrote: > >>On January 09, 2001 at 04:55:19, Jouni Uski wrote: >> >>>On January 09, 2001 at 04:08:38, Ulrich Tuerke wrote: >>> >>>>On January 09, 2001 at 03:09:39, Jouni Uski wrote: >>>> >>>>>If I am not complete wrong please note: >>>>> >>>>>Because Gandalf is so slow in NPS sense (about 1/4 of many top engines) it needs >>>>>much less HASH table RAM than other programs and if You give too much HASH it >>>>>weakens engine! So my recommendation: >>>>> >>>>> 500 Mhz PC 32MB >>>>> 1000 Mhz PC 56MB >>>>> >>>>>The readme.txt to use 104MB for >128MB PC is not wise at all. >>>>> >>>>>Jouni >>>> >>>>I don't see, why "too much" hash could do any harm. >>>>Uli >>> >>>I am not sure may be there is minor bug in hashing code. With 104MB (or similar) >>>clearing of hash seems to take 5-10 seconds in my PC! >> >>This sounds weird. You shouldn't need 5-10 seconds for memory operations. >>Perhaps your hash size is too close to your memory size and Windows starts >>paging ? > >It depends if you simply clean the whole memory with zeroes or if you set a flag >for each hash entry. In that case it is indeed better not to use large hash >tables if you are low on time (e.g. in bullet games). > >Best wishes, >Steffen. Come on, 5-10 seconds ! This must be massive hard disk access. A "memset" for hundreds of MB can't take that long.
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.