Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto
Date: 15:13:45 09/04/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 04, 2003 at 17:13:42, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >>Uh, that's a tricky comparison. You don't know how I or Vincent order >>our moves > >Crafty is GPL, ergo you should be at least as good or you need to read the >crafty source again :) Crafty isn't GPL. Your statement is wrong, because the programs are simply different. If you have a program with attacktables, you'll use em in moveordering. If you don't, you won't be able to, and maybe move ordering will hence be worse. You could add attacktables and get better move ordering, but then you go slower of course. An example in point is that Yace uses(used?) MVV/LVA instead of SEE. Technology from one program isn't necessarily transferable to another. > and I fail to see why you 'know' that we are searching slower >>(hint: NPS is not a good indicator). > >why not? if it takes 1ms to evaluate a node, then split overhead is relatively >smaller. admittedly I've never written a parallel search, but this seems >logical to me. The way the nodes are counted is not necessarily the same. -- GCP
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.