Author: Dieter Buerssner
Date: 16:57:34 03/08/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 08, 2001 at 15:30:19, leonid wrote:
>On March 07, 2001 at 22:34:41, Dieter Buerssner wrote:
>
>>On March 07, 2001 at 16:48:55, leonid wrote:
>>
>>>rkrR1q2/qqq1Q1Rq/nnQbN2Q/Qq2N3/3n2Q1/1Q1Q3b/2q3BB/Q6K w - -
>>
nodes time score depth PV {mat. balance in centipawns at end of PV}
>> 3735698 54.286 Mat07 2. 1.Qexc7+ Bxc7 2.Nd7+ Nxd7 3.Qaxc7+ Qxc7
>> 4.Qbxb5+ Nxb5 5.Qdxb5+ Nb6 6.Qbxb6+ Qxb6
>> 7.Qxb6# {350}
>If you looked through this position by brute force, please say me what was
>average nodes/second rate for this position.
>
>Recently, I speeded my mate solver and installed in the same time NPS counter.
>Was surprised by finding that NPS is very low. It is usually somewhere between
>35k and 120K on my AMD 400Mhz.
I just want to confirm, that Uri's answers were correct. I included a line, that
hopefully explains the output of Yace. Sorry, I was too lazy to include this in
my first post. My hardware: AMD K6-2 475. I cannot remember the hash setting,
but it probably was 20M. Also, I probably tested this position, while my
soft-modem was running and eating some CPU cycles. Usually Yace gets about
150000 nodes/s on my hardware in middlegame. In your "why only two queens?"
positions, I only get half of this, or even less.
Without carefully analyzing this, I think, that most moves of the PV were found
in quiescence search. This is also the reason, that the quiescence search tree
of Yace can easily explode with many of the positions you posted. There are just
too many checks and captures possible.
Regards,
Dieter
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.