Author: Uri Blass
Date: 06:20:11 10/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 21, 2002 at 08:36:47, Daniel Clausen wrote: >On October 21, 2002 at 07:14:51, Brian Katz wrote: > >>On October 21, 2002 at 06:22:59, Daniel Clausen wrote: > >[snip] > >>>>As an experiment, since I believe Fritz 7 performs better than Deep-Fritz 7 >>>>when using a single processor (even though Chessbase boasts otherwise, >>>>stating that DF7 is stronger even when usning a single processor). >>>>I raised the Hash Table settings for Fritz 7 to 192 MB as opposed to >>>>Deep-Fritz 7 set at 32 MB Hash. >>>>Surely, 192 should be much too high for such a time control with my processor >>>>speed. Well, Fritz 7 still beat out Deep-Fritz 7 by 5.0-3.0 > > >>I don't think one needs a degree to notice that if 10 8 round tournaments are >>run, and one engine comes out ahead in almost all of them, that there might >>something to it. I have also had many 20 round tournaments with Fritz 7 coming >>out ahead. > >You wrote in your first post, that you played 8 games with the new HT-setting >for DF. I replied to exactly that, nothing more nothing less. > >I'm not sure under what circumstances you played all the other 8-round >tournaments where F7 won, but: > >1. You didn't mention them in the first post He mentioned that he decided to give Fritz7 more hash because it believes that Fritz7 is stronger. It is clear that this is based on previous games with different hash tables. >2. It sounds to me that the setting "192MB for DF" was not active then and >therefore is a completely different test You are right here but the point is that Fritz7 got better result with smaller hash and also got better result with the 192 Mbytes hash tables. It is not a proof but it suggests that Fritz7 is better for his machine Uri
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.