Author: pavel
Date: 21:36:46 02/09/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 10, 2002 at 00:18:57, Uri Blass wrote: >On February 09, 2002 at 22:26:17, Chessfun wrote: > >>On February 09, 2002 at 21:03:13, pavel wrote: >> >>>[D]6k1/4qp2/2b4p/4P1pP/p2Q4/1p4R1/5PP1/6K1 w - - 0 1 >>> >>> >>>55.Rd3 -0.06/13 1:56 >>> >>> >>>>1.Qc3! >>>> µ (-0.94) Depth: 13/34 00:01:12 32546kN >>>>1.Re3! >>>> µ (-0.91) Depth: 13/34 00:01:23 37257kN >>>>1.Kh2! >>>> µ (-0.87) Depth: 13/34 00:01:47 52317kN >>>>1.Kh2! >>>> µ (-0.72) Depth: 13/34 00:01:49 53550kN >>>>1.Kh2! >>>> ³ (-0.41) Depth: 13/34 00:01:59 59573kN >>>> >>>>(Sarah, Home 09.02.2002) >>> >>> >>>I guess the reason it missed the better move is because of inferior hardware >>>than yours and because the move was played in a game. >> >>I knew that already. >>My post was to indicate that Fritz knew at depth 13 opposed to >>Deep Fritz's depth 14. > >The history of the game and the hash tables may be relevant so in order to be >convinced that Fritz7 can find it faster you need to do one of the following: > >1)analyze with your copy of Deep Fritz the position at the same >condition(without the history of the game) > >2)doing the following steps: >a)copy the full game(it is possible that the history of the game is relevant for >the depth it finds Kh2) >b)give Fritz7 48 Mbytes hash tables(it is possible that more hash tables helped >Fritz7 to find Kh2 at depth 13). > > > >Uri I used 100mb for each programs, which I always do in long games, is it relevant? pavs
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.