Author: Slater Wold
Date: 16:20:25 09/22/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 22, 2001 at 18:29:46, Andreas De Troy wrote: >When I see results for the so called "Fritzmarks", I notice that the actual >numbers decrease with increasing hashtables. Is this an artefact of the >measurement? In other words, are larger hashtables always better? I suppose it >depends of the speed of the processor. If you have, for instance an Athlon 1 Ghz >(or a 1.5 Ghz or...), does it -in general- make sense to increase the size of >the hashtables to 256 Mb, 512 Mb or more? > >Thanks in advance for any help! Robert Hyatt has proven (with Crafty) that the bigger the hash, the better the search. Too much hash, is of course, worse than anything. Simply because it will start using the HD to swap memory, and memory is already slow enough, without having to swap off the hard drive. It depends on the time controls, the speed of the computer, and the program. On my dual AMD 1.4Ghz using Fritz 5.32, I can fill 818MB of hash in less than 3 minutes. Now imagine when I am running Deep Fritz, which gets about 1.7M nps! (In middlegame.) 818MB isn't going to last long. On the otherhand, Deep Shredder takes about 3 minutes to fill 512MB of hash. However, Shredder is only getting 500 nps in the middlegame. So it fills the hash slower. I believe the goal is, to just about fill the hash. Using 64MB of hash, when you're searching for 3 minutes a move doesn't make sense, as well as using 818MB of hash when your searching 20 seconds a move. It's all relative. You just have to use good judgement. Slate
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.