Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:38:01 07/26/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 26, 2001 at 18:40:48, Odd Gunnar Malin wrote: >On July 26, 2001 at 10:43:45, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>On July 26, 2001 at 09:56:24, Matthias Gemuh wrote: >>>I think you just wanted to make a joke. We all know that PONDER OFF hurts nobody >>>(Fritz used its full time). PONDER ON on one CPU is very appropriate to arrive >>>at wrong engine comparasons. > >>Nope... no joke at all. Two programs, one machine, my preference is ponder=on. >>both will get 1/2 of the machine and the time controls won't be screwed up. >> >>ponder=off exposes the opportunity for a program to get into time trouble >>because it assumes it will save time with ponder=on when it really can't since >>it is disabled... >> >>ponder=on is the right way to test _everything_ IMHO, unless you have so little >>memory that both programs won't fit at the same time. > >What if only one engine have ponder on? >Who would be the sufferer, maybe that with ponder on. At least in timetrouble it >could make some bad moves? >An idea to normalize the time usage in the search with cpu-time? > >Odd Gunnar \ That would be bad. the one with ponder=on would get 100% of the cpu when it was thinking, and 50% of the time when the opponent is thinking... single-machine tournaments are worthless for that reason...
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.