Author: John Merlino
Date: 16:45:34 04/10/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 10, 2001 at 17:59:11, Brian Kostick wrote: >On April 10, 2001 at 12:18:33, John Merlino wrote: > >>On April 10, 2001 at 01:50:29, Paul Doire wrote: >> >>>Hardware:541Mhz celeron 128 mb ram win98se >>>G/5, All engines have 32 MB Hash except CM default. >>>All engine settings found here at this site >>> >>>Results: W D L Games Score >>>CM KKND 32H 10 8 6 24 14.0 >>>Chessmaster(default) 7 12 5 24 13.0 >>>CM 32H 7 9 8 24 11.5 >>>CM DEEP 32H(Kostick bk)6 10 8 24 11.0 >>>CM 8777 32H 5 11 8 24 10.5 >>> >>>CM KKND is clearly stronger in this sampling. >>>I have also played many offhand games with CM KKND against >>>Gambit Tiger 2...G/5 same pc ponder on, and CM KKND appears >>>to win 60-70% of the time! >> >>This (in some way) goes to prove one VERY IMPORTANT point that Johan and I have >>stated time and time again. A 32MB hash table is 31MB too many for a G/5 game! >>Johan uses the general rule of thumb of 1 byte per average position searched per >>move. Since, on the average, CM8000 searches between 50K and 100K moves per >>second (depending on processor speed -- your Celeron is going to be closer to >>50K), this means that, unless the engine is going to have more than 10 seconds >>average PER MOVE, there is NO REASON for anything more than a 1MB hash table. >>Johan believes that, unless you're on a very fast processor, a 1MB hash table is >>fine for everything up to G/10. >> >>The reason for the point that I'm making is that, with each new move, CM clears >>out its hash table. A 32MB hash table takes approximately 1/2 second to clear. >>In a G/5 game that goes 80 moves, this means that the engine has lost 40 >>seconds, compared to a personality with an appropriate 1MB hash table. This >>explains why the default personality had a better score than the 32MB version of >>the default personality. >> >>HOWEVER, the next version of the patch (due out very soon), is going to fix this >>problem to some degree. Johan has made the clearing of the hash table almost >>"instant", meaning that using a too large hash table in a blitz game will no >>longer be a detriment. >> >>As for your stating that KKND is "clearly stronger", I see absolutely no >>evidence of that -- 1 point in a 24 game tournament? This is, statistically, >>meaningless. >> >>jm > >To follow up, here are some game results. A bit over 100 games in each >tournament. Please note WAY different machines AND time controls, so no use to >compare one to the other. Err... the way it looks, maybe no need to compare >different TT sizes either. Regards, BK > > >Player Wins Draws Losses Games Score >ChessmasterTT02 12 11 5 28 17.5 >ChessmasterTT16 7 16 5 28 15.0 >ChessmasterTT08 9 11 8 28 14.5 >ChessmasterTT64 9 11 8 28 14.5 >ChessmasterTT32 10 8 10 28 14.0 >ChessmasterTT04 10 7 11 28 13.5 >ChessmasterTT01 6 13 9 28 12.5 >ChessmasterTT00 7 7 14 28 10.5 > >Computer: PIII 733MHz, 256MB Ram total >Time Control: 5/3 Fischer Time > > >Player Wins Draws Losses Games Score >ChessmasterTT08 11 15 4 30 18.5 >ChessmasterTT02 7 21 2 30 17.5 >ChessmasterTT16 6 20 4 30 16.0 >ChessmasterTT512kb 7 16 7 30 15.0 >ChessmasterTT00 4 19 7 30 13.5 >ChessmasterTT01 4 17 9 30 12.5 >ChessmasterTT04 5 14 11 30 12.0 > >Computer: Pentium 60MHz, 64MB RAM total >Time Control: 40moves/40minutes Quite honestly, I would suspect that the 1MB or 2MB versions would win a Fischer 5/3 tournament, and the 4MB or 8MB would win the 40/40 tournament (over the LONG term, of course), but for different reasons. In the short time control, larger hash tables are at a disadvantage because of the time to clear them for each move (apart from just being wasted space). At longer time controls larger time controls are more useful because they can store more data, and the time to clear them is not as much of a percentage of the overall average move time. The longer the time control, the less this problem is detrimental to the engine. It really only comes into play when we're talking about 15 seconds or less to make a move, on average. Try this: 32 (or more) games at G/5 (or faster) with ChessmasterTT32 against ChessmasterTT01. This may (or may not ;-) illustrate my point.... jm
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.