Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Ilya Smirin - Hiarcs 8 ½-½ - Hiarcs was seeing a strong advantage...

Author: Odd Gunnar Malin

Date: 00:01:01 04/26/02

Go up one level in this thread


On April 26, 2002 at 01:05:01, Uri Blass wrote:

>On April 25, 2002 at 23:14:38, Jeremiah Penery wrote:
>
>>On April 25, 2002 at 13:33:03, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>take Crafty, use the default hash, and search for (say) 5 minutes, a typical
>>>search for 40/2hr time controls.  Then double the hash and try again.  And
>>>double and try again.  The time required for the search will vary from 2x-3x
>>>(or more)...  In middlegame positions.
>>>
>>>I posted some test results like this several years ago in r.g.c.c when
>>>KomputerKorner asked me to run the test to give some real answers on how
>>>hashing affected middlegame positions.  The answer was more than I thought.
>>
>>I actually remember it being less than expected - I've found the link:
>>
>>http://groups.google.com/groups?q=crafty+hash&hl=en&selm=7b1o5j%24qhm%241%40juniper.cis.uab.edu&rnum=3
>>
>>[D]3rr1k1/1p2b1pp/p1b1p3/8/PnBBq3/2Q2N2/1PP3PP/R4R1K b - - 0 1
>>
>>This position was searched to 11 ply (Crafty version unspecified), here are the
>>results for different hash sizes:
>>
>>        hash table sizes
>>time     bytes   entries     nodes searched
>>-------------------------------------------
>>13:13     96kb        6K        157,085,451
>>12:03    192kb       12K        142,633,162
>>10:31    384kb       24K        123,762,238
>> 9:28    768kb       49K        110,838,220
>> 8:38     1.5M       98K        100,802,339
>> 7:48       3M      196K         90,979,000
>> 7:22       6M      392K         85,975,960
>> 6:53      12M      800K         80,347,212
>> 6:32      24M      1.5M         76,465,119
>> 6:22      48M      3.0M         74,738,532
>> 6:13      96M      6.0M         73,253,374
>> 6:05     192M     12.0M         71,581,397
>> 6:03     384M     24.0M         71,156,722
>>
>>
>>So about 12 doublings in size give a speedup of slightly over 2.  That's not
>>such a huge amount. :)
>
>Thenks for the information.
>It suggests that 6-7 elo from doubling the hash size is really close to the
>truth.
>
>There is a big difference between 6K and 24M but there is not a very big
>difference between 6M and bigger hash tables and in my case I guess that there
>is not very big difference between 8M hash for chezzz and bigger hash tables.
>
>Uri

You are probably right. Dennis M. Breuker did a test with several different
replacement scheme in his 'Ph.D. thesis: Memory versus Search in Games' and
found out that the gain start with much gain but begin to level out around 512K
entries (If 1 entry=16byte, 16*512K=8M) and at 1024K or before the gain is only
3% for each doubling.
Ref: http://www.breuker.demon.nl/thesis/index.html , Chapter 2, page 35.
This is for midlegame positions.

Most gain from transposition tables is in the endgame, but here just a little
table would gain many plies, so that the curve is maybe even more precipitous
for endgames.

Odd Gunnar

Odd Gunnar



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.