Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 18:01:01 01/12/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 12, 2003 at 20:25:01, Bas Hamstra wrote: >I test it with all pieces being still on the board, while the square in question >is not attacked. So a worst case scenario. In that case, the bitboards should perform about equally fast in any position whether there is an attack or not. The 0x88 isn't the same though. It will be slower if there is no attack, and faster if there is. So if you used more positions (not just a few, but a lot, like during a search) you might find it to be faster overall. Gerbil is faster than Crafty, sometimes almost twice as fast, and so that speed has to come from somewhere. >No, but my BB program (Tao) does typically around 400k nps where Crafty does >600k on my hardware, so slower. The new 0x88 toy doesn't even have a search yet, >but I aim for at least 1M nps in the midgame for piece/square plus extensive >pawn eval. Gerbil, on my PC (PIII 733 MHz), gets between 500knps and 800knps in the games I have played with it. For comparison, Crafty gets between 300knps and 500knps. My computer is certainly not the newest fastest thing, so I imagine Gerbil could get 1Mnps easily on a faster machine, and so could your 0x88 program. >Yes, I thought about that. I don't see a point in looping through 8 pawns to see >if one square is attacked, that's why I put the conditionals in, which saves >about half of the piece-loop and should be faster overall, I would suspect. Good point. I didn't consider that. Russell
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.