Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 05:41:57 01/13/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 13, 2002 at 08:29:35, Uri Blass wrote: >On January 13, 2002 at 08:07:49, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: > >>On January 13, 2002 at 07:05:16, Tina Long wrote: >> >>>Gigantic hash tables for very quick time limit didn't suit Gandalf? >> >>I don't think so. The Athlon can clear 200M in a split second, and >>it plays 1 0 games fine with this setting. >> >>>Gandalf is more knowledge based so GambitTigger looked a lot deeper because of >>>the quick time limit? >> >>Mm. Perhaps. Gandalf doesn't search very deeply, Tiger does. This won't >>change when playing slower games. Gandalf will search a ply deeper, but >>so will Tiger (and perhaps two). >> >>>The extra Tablebases helped GT? >> >>There's no practical advantage to using 6 man >>tablebases. (according to Robert) >> >>>Sample size too small? >> >>24 games isn't much, but it's still a huge score difference, >>enough to be significant. I'll plug the result into elostat >>and see what comes out. >> >>>Did you notice any explaining factors or do you think this is a fair comparison >>>of strength? >> >>I think it's fair comparison, the hardware was about equal and both were playing >>at full strength. If there is something wrong with my setup >>(I was operating Gandalf), then I honestly wouldn't know what is was. >> >>>Apriori I would have expected about 8-6-10 or thereabouts. >> >>Hmm. I'm disappointed with Gandalf so far. I used to run Fritz 7 on the same >>account and with Gandalf the rating has dropped about 70-100 points! >> >>It doesn't seem to be a real top program to me. I wonder what the SSDF result >>will be. >> >>-- >>GCP > >I will try another possible theory(I do not have gandalf5 so I cannot check it) > >Maybe gandalf need time to get used to big hash tables for some reason. > >The fact that it does not lose on time even on 1 0 games does not contradict >this theory because it is possible that gandalf starts by searching 50 knodes >per second in the first seconds and only after a minute the number of nodes per >second becomes 300 knodes per second and the time that gandalf needs to get used >to big hash tables is bigger than the time that it needs to >get used to small hash tables. I have no idea why or how you think this is possible. It would make the chessprogram practically useless! It's wrong. I see it is by looking at the statistics window. Gandalf does about 300-400 (800 in some endgames) knps on my system, and that number is fairly constant. Moreover, also by observing the stats window, I do not have the impression that Gandalf clears it hashtables frequently, so I do not think they had anything to do with it. -- GCP
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.