Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 11:26:57 04/11/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 11, 2003 at 14:06:23, Keith Evans wrote: >On April 11, 2003 at 07:56:02, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On April 10, 2003 at 17:14:21, Keith Evans wrote: >> >>>On April 10, 2003 at 15:26:24, Johan Hutting wrote: >>> >>>>On April 10, 2003 at 13:56:29, Keith Evans wrote: >>>> >>>>> Is the 500 >>>>>processor box running Windows? Linux? >>>> >>>>Operating system: Irix >>>>(http://www.sara.nl/userinfo/teras/usage/progavail/irix/index.html) >>>> >>>>other stats: http://www.sara.nl/userinfo/teras/description/index.html >>> >>>Vincent are you able to run the same code on an SMP PC and on a 500 CPU CC-NUMA >>>machine? >> >>yes 100% the same code compiles. i do not modify a byte in fact. >> >>the makefile in irix has litterary: >> >>-DIRIX >> >>and the windows file doesn't have that one. >> >>in my diep.h: >> >>#if IRIX >> #define MAXPROCESSES 512 >>#else >> #define MAXPROCESSES 16 // right now, used to be 8 ;) >> >>>Curious, >>>Keith > >Cool. > >Pardon my ignorance, but when is the big competition again? > >Will you publish some technical info after the comp? Like what sort of speedup >you're getting from 512 processors? > >Regards, >Keith Everything will be published including logfiles with numbers in it. i never play unfair. everything will be posted on the diep speedups also in the ICGA journal with url where you can find the logfiles (or i'll email them at request). maximum number of addressable cpu's is 508 then some need to be used by other dudes who continuesly do stuff. so i hope that isn't 300 cpu's during the tournament as then only 200 are left to get used. I can only do those 500 processor tests probably during the rounds at world champs 2003. The only thing i cannot garantuee is when the logfiles get posted. It will be probably around or after the world champs. Not before, but directly after sure. Most likely the logfiles while playing get posted while it plays. Except perhaps the game against the junior team the logfiles will not be posted live, because i do know what they do if they see a brilliant line from DIEP in the logfile... I would be very happy with around 10% speedup. But never forget that's actual speedup. that's with a program which also runs well at a single cpu machine. zugzwang claimed for example 50% speedup. but that was with 512 processors and in total 5 ply searches fullwidth were performed. he calculated speedup based upon number of nodes at a 5 ply fullwidth search. Imagine that i create a bug in diep that only 1 cpu searches and the rest idles. Then my speedup in number of nodes is of course 100%. But my speedup in time is 1.0 out of 512. They concluded 50% from that, which is very poor if you consider how little nodes a second a single cpu also got with them. I do not see how they could do that. Their way of measuring sucked. Deep Blue guessed with a wet finger that it was 8% without any evidence at around 30 nodes. Not even their output shows number of searches searched. Hyatt on the other hand claims on a shared memory machine 11.x out of 16 cpu's or so. He did not slow down his program 30 times like the zugzwang team did, but did some modification to his search results as i have proven in august 2002. you still can get the data in a table and look for yourself. All he tried to cover up for is probably a factor 2 which he lost somewhere. Still considering the fact that he didn't slow down his thing 30 times, it is a very good speed. Then we have many poor researches. Without exception they managed all to get great results, without showing any logfile. DIEP's output however shows everything. In logfiles are all statistics available. local hashhits,globalhashhits, number of nodes needed for each ply and for each mainline. number of searches done. number of failhighaborts (1 cpu aborting possibly other cpu's as well), how many nodes were done during nullmove, etcetera. In short nothing amateuristic where by not showing anything you can cover up for having a sucking program. I have no statistics to hide in that respect. To my sponsor NWO i have already written down in the 400 pages or so i wrote to get system time (that doesn't only involve nwo but another 6 other organisations), that it is my intention to publish all logfiles open and fair. No bad science there. The NWO of course is an organisation that appreciates this. Best regards, Vincent
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.