Author: Gregor Overney
Date: 14:17:48 01/24/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 24, 2001 at 14:26:14, Richard Heldmann wrote: >I neglected to add the games were 1 hour each. Two to three years ago, I gave it up to compare Crafty vs. Junior 5 when running on the _same_ CPU. Too frequent cache flushes appeared to hurt Crafty more than Junior 5. Crafty performs the best when running on its own CPU, even better, on its own system. Its search engine is not hand-crafted in assembler. But Junior is using one that has been hand-crafted for x86. Today, modern chess engines might even be hand-crafted to use SIMD and MXX-2 very efficiently. Something Crafty on a Pentium-based system does not do. In case of Crafty, it's up to the compiler to do the right thing. Sure, there is SPARC.s and X86.s, but that's not too much compared to a real platform dependent finetune. Crafty with its evaluation functions and a better finetune, might be as good as all commercial programs on a Pentium based system. But that's not the goal of Crafty. Crafty is almost platform independent. It's a great design implemented in ANSI C (well, if you forget about this C++ "monster" called egtb.cpp, which serves a special need to utilize tablebases). Gregor
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.