Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:07:38 09/05/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 05, 2002 at 10:49:13, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On September 05, 2002 at 03:56:20, Vincent Lejeune wrote: > >No it's not 1.862 speedup at all. Both searches >come from hashtable. It's useless compare. > >In diep it would be 0 seconds to get it all from hashtable. He ran the test wrong. It won't affect the NPS much, however, as we are not measuring SMP speedup, but simply raw NPS speedup, to address your ridiculous claim about smp vs non-smp crafty. The numbers I have checked so far didn't make this mistake, and they are right in line with what I expect, and far better than what you claim... >I have true values in my hashtable, crafty obviously has a bug >in implementation of it, otherwise getting to 12 ply wouldn't >take 14 seconds in the search 2. Default hash size? we are using default hash size? we are mixing apples and oranges? I'm only looking at raw NPS. > >>On September 05, 2002 at 02:15:58, Volker Pittlik wrote: >> >>>System: 2*433 MHz Celeron, 128 MB RAM, NT 4.0 >>> >>>Results: >>> >>>... >>>hash table memory = 12M bytes. >>>pawn hash table memory = 3M bytes. >>>... >>>EGTB cache memory = 2M bytes. >>>4 piece tablebase files found >>>1414kb of RAM used for TB indices and decompression tables >>>... >>>search time set to 180.00. >>>pondering disabled. >>>search depth set to 13. >>>... >>>Crafty v18.15 (2 cpus) >>> >>>... >>>White(1): mt=1 >>>max threads set to 1 >>>White(1): setboard 2r2rk1/1bqnbpp1/1p1ppn1p/pP6/N1P1P3/P2B1N1P/1B2QPP1/R2R2K1 b >>>- - 0 1 >>> >>>Black(1): go >>> clearing hash tables >>> time surplus 0.00 time limit 3:00 (3:00) >>> nss depth time score variation (1) >>> 8-> 0.80 -0.63 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 <HT> >>> 9 0.80 -0.63 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 <HT> >>> 9-> 1.64 -0.63 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 <HT> >>> 10 1.64 -0.63 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 <HT> >>> 10-> 4.40 -0.63 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 <HT> >>> 11 4.40 -0.63 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 <HT> >>> 11-> 13.69 -0.63 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 <HT> >>> 12 13.69 -0.63 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 <HT> >>> 12-> 26.58 -0.63 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 <HT> >>> 13 1:34 -0.60 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 Qxc4 3. Qxc4 Rxc4 >>> 4. Nxb6 Rxe4 5. Nxd7 Nxd7 6. Bd4 e5 >>> 7. Be3 Rb8 8. Nd2 Rh4 >>> 13-> 2:04 -0.60 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 Qxc4 3. Qxc4 Rxc4 >>> 4. Nxb6 Rxe4 5. Nxd7 Nxd7 6. Bd4 e5 >>> 7. Be3 Rb8 8. Nd2 Rh4 >>> time=2:04 cpu=99% mat=0 n=25416120 fh=92% nps=203k >>> ext-> chk=236848 cap=77200 pp=4763 1rep=11848 mate=1281 >>> predicted=0 nodes=25416120 evals=6188352 >>> endgame tablebase-> probes done=0 successful=0 >>> SMP-> split=0 stop=0 data=0/32 cpu=2:04 elap=2:04 >>> >>>... >>>White(2): new >>>... >>>White(1): mt=2 >>>max threads set to 2 >>>White(1): setboard 2r2rk1/1bqnbpp1/1p1ppn1p/pP6/N1P1P3/P2B1N1P/1B2QPP1/R2R2K1 b >>>- - 0 1 >>> >>>Black(1): go >>> clearing hash tables >>> time surplus 0.00 time limit 3:00 (3:00) >>> nss depth time score variation (1) >>>starting thread 1 >>> 8-> 0.46 -0.63 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 <HT> >>> 9 0.46 -0.63 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 <HT> >>> 9-> 0.91 -0.63 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 <HT> >>> 10 0.91 -0.63 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 <HT> >>> 10-> 2.39 -0.63 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 <HT> >>> 11 2.39 -0.63 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 <HT> >>> 11-> 7.44 -0.63 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 <HT> >>> 12 7.46 -0.63 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 <HT> >>> 12-> 14.46 -0.63 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 <HT> >>> 13 52.14 -0.60 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 Qxc4 3. Qxc4 Rxc4 >>> 4. Nxb6 Rxe4 5. Nxd7 Nxd7 6. Bd4 e5 >>> 7. Be3 Rb8 8. Nd2 Rh4 >>> 13-> 1:10 -0.60 1. ... Bxe4 2. Bxe4 Qxc4 3. Qxc4 Rxc4 >>> 4. Nxb6 Rxe4 5. Nxd7 Nxd7 6. Bd4 e5 >>> 7. Be3 Rb8 8. Nd2 Rh4 >>> time=1:10 cpu=579% mat=0 n=26743151 fh=92% nps=378k >>> ext-> chk=252682 cap=81998 pp=5746 1rep=13038 mate=1314 >>> predicted=0 nodes=26743151 evals=6550687 >>> endgame tablebase-> probes done=0 successful=0 >>> SMP-> split=127 stop=8 data=5/32 cpu=6:49 elap=1:10
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.