Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 13:07:08 11/19/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 19, 2002 at 14:56:27, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >On November 19, 2002 at 14:53:45, Russell Reagan wrote: > >>On November 19, 2002 at 14:33:53, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >> >>>A factor 2? I don't know about you, but I think a factor 2 is _big_. >> >>Surely a factor of two in move generation is not that significant. Even if you >>had an effective branching factor of 2 (which no one has consistently) you still >>wouldn't gain even an extra ply. >> >>And a 2x speedup in move generation or make/unmake doesn't indicate that the >>engine is any faster at all. It might do things elsewhere that someone else does >>in make/unmake for example. >> >>A factor of 2 in move generation or make/unmake says that they're in the same >>ballpark to me. > >Then what's the point in mentioning this as a proof that bitboards >are not inferior on 32-bit hardware? > >-- >GCP What "proof" would you like to see? IE no one can offer something you accept as reasonable, so what do you _want_ to see to verify that bitmaps are faster on 64 bit architectures relative to 32 bit architectures??
This page took 0.01 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.