Author: Matt Taylor
Date: 15:33:38 12/08/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 08, 2002 at 17:10:58, Edward Seid wrote: >The thing I don't like about using Crafty to compare benchmarks is that everyone >uses different versions of Crafty. In addition, for any particular version, >there's the Eugene Nalimov compile, the Dann Corbit compile, and who knows what >other compiles, all giving different bench results. It would be hard to compare >my machine vs other people's unless we know we're using the exact same version >and compile. > >Perhaps a better choice would be a more established program like Yace 0.99.56 >which has been the same version for over 1 year. But I don't know if it has a >bench command. > >On December 08, 2002 at 16:31:06, Matt Taylor wrote: > >>Sandra is like any other synthetic benchmark: not indicitive of real-world >>performance. >> >>The best benchmark I know of is running an actual chess engine (e.g. Crafty) and >>reporting nps. Well, there are two metrics to consider. You can consider a general optimized version of a chess engine not optimized for a specific processor. You can also consider specially optimized forms for each processor. In this case, I think the latter is likely more important since people will want to optimize a particular chess engine for their system. Determining standard builds is quite difficult, though. Perhaps that's why nobody has done it. :-) And yes, any particular chess engine will do. I picked Crafty arbitrarily, but just about any relatively complex engine will work. -Matt
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.