Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: T2002 [60/120'] TheKing312X winner: Great report

Author: Dieter Buerssner

Date: 13:13:39 03/17/02

Go up one level in this thread


On March 17, 2002 at 15:55:01, John Merlino wrote:

>Once again, a fabulous report and many thanks to everybody who was involved in
>running this tournament. It was a joy to watch and was incredibly exciting as it
>neared the finish.

I agree!

>One correction, though. In your report, you state:
>
>------------------------
>It must be emphasized that in all our tests and the 4500 games we have played at
>40'/40, it was the original TheKing312 engine that has been used that means
>
>TheKing 3.12
>123 KB (125'952 Byte)
>18th October 2000
>
>and neither TheKing 3.12c [124 KB=126'976 Byte, 12th February 2001] nor TheKing
>3.12d [124 KB=127'488 Byte, 5th July 2001]. We do not know whether this may be
>of any significance regarding playing strength as the three versions should more
>or less be identical. As far as we know, the orginal engine [18th October 2000]
>does clear the hashtables after each move whereas the versions 3.12c and 3.12d
>keep the hashtables in memory.
>------------------------
>
>This is not correct. The King 3.12c and 3.12d also clear their hashtables after
>every move. However, they clear them much FASTER. This was in response to many
>users who were using 32MB or even 64MB of hash table memory in blitz games
>(obviously, useless).

I think, this is not obvious. I believe, quite some engines can fill (say) 32 Mb
of hashtables in Blitz games.

>The original King 3.12 could take as long as 2 seconds to
>clear a 64MB hash table (on a slower machine), which could really be a problem
>in a blitz game (i.e. losing 2 seconds per move). So, Johan found a way to clear
>the hash tables about 30 times faster in version 3.12c.

Very interesting. 2 seconds for 64 Mb, 1 second for 32 Mb then. 30 times faster
means about 1 Gb/s. Hmmm - this really sounds impossible, if you mean the same
by "clear" than I do. I can imagine to make this situation (two large HTs for
this engine at this fast time control) much faster - with some compromise. One
easy method would be, to have a move counter in the HTs, and allways ignore HT
entries with a non up to date move counter. This would be essentially the same
as clearing. But then, "30 times faster" would make no sense. Because the effort
for changing and comparing the move counter would be very dependant on the
actual hash table size and the time control. What I mean - with 32 Mb HTs and 1
second per game, the factor would be infinity, while it gets smaller with longer
time control. With 2 min + 12 s (which many will consider as Blitz), this factor
would be much smaller than 2. So, you really seem to mean some real clearing.
Now, would you enlighten us, how this can be done (the 1 Gb/s)?
If not - I can understand it as well ...

Regards,
Dieter




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.