Author: Mark Young
Date: 01:17:11 09/23/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 23, 1998 at 03:13:05, Les Walker wrote: >On September 23, 1998 at 02:06:36, Mark Young wrote: > >>On September 22, 1998 at 21:19:12, James Robertson wrote: >> >>>On September 22, 1998 at 16:21:40, Mark Young wrote: >>> >>>>On September 22, 1998 at 15:40:08, James Robertson wrote: >>>> >>>>>On September 22, 1998 at 14:01:26, Mark Young wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Match to be 6 games. >>>>>>Played on two P II 333, 128mb ram. >>>>>>Chessmaster 6000, (default settings)except for Hash set to 64mb. >>>>>>Fritz 5, 80 Mb hash, None default book made from 1,000,000+ master level games. >>>>> >>>>>Why are hash table sizes uneven? >>>> >>>>The next size up for Chessmaster 6000 is 128mb of hash. So 64mb is max with 128 >>>>megs of ram. >>> >>>Why not reduce Fritz to 64? >> >>It is very simple. You do not handicap one program because of the limitations of >>another program. If I was testing Genius 5 Vs Fritz 5, Would I force Fritz 5 to >>play with only 32mb of ram, because the max. that Chess Genius 5 can use is 32. >>No. I have to equal machines; I try to set the programs up to play their best on >>each machine. If one program is better at getting more out the same computer >>then another program, then that is to the program and programmers credit. > >Ok, I see now. So, basically, you are testing the overall performance of the >*entire* program, not just the strength of the engine. Yes exactly, that how I prefer to test programs. I do not buy into engine only testing, but others do, and they also post their results, so you can pick what data you think best represents the programs true strength. This makes sense. Thanks >for the info. I do wonder, though, just for fun, what the results would be if >the hash were to be set as equal. > > >Best Regards, > >Les W.
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.