Author: karen Dall Lynn
Date: 08:24:14 03/09/02
Greetings [[all]] Steve Lopez has recently released a T-note advancing a formula to deploy optimized hash table sizes. As known, the formula is a function of processor size and average thinking time per move. What is characteristic of this formula is that it settles much smaller hashtable sizes than I have been using or than the most commonly referred sizes in ordinary games. But if hashtables should be set to something between 16-64Mb for ordinary blitz games on processors 1500(+-)500 Ghz, **why the call of the optimize-strength funcion in Fritz 7 makes the hashtable size grow to the top size under available RAM?*** In my case, it increases to 608Mb from my 768Mb, leaving sometimes no more than 7-30Mb to the rest? Again, if Steve Lopez' formula is the right way to do it, why Fritz 7 optimizes strength entering bulk sizes to fat hashtables? Why the program does not apply some algorithm akin to the thinner proposed formula? I have also tested my F7 Fritzmark (P4 1500Ghz/768Rambus)against distinct hashtable sizes, getting the following results: 16Mb 763kN/s (+-)7 32Mb 785kN/s (+-)14 64Mb 801kN/s (+-)0 128Mb 778kN/s (+-)0 256Mb 763kN/s (+-)5 512Mb 723kN/s (+-)18 It suggests that neither top nor bottom sizes will mirror optimal hardware speed - so, if hardware speed is a hallmark of efficience, maybe optimizing automatically strength will boil down to a slower and therefore less efficient engine ability. Karen
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.