Author: Gerhard Sonnabend
Date: 22:03:43 10/14/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 14, 2003 at 18:37:36, Mikael Bäckman wrote: >On October 14, 2003 at 13:11:25, Gerhard Sonnabend wrote: > >>On October 14, 2003 at 10:38:00, Mikael Bäckman wrote: >> >>>On October 14, 2003 at 07:21:47, James T. Walker wrote: >>> >>>>On October 14, 2003 at 06:46:39, martin fierz wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 14, 2003 at 06:19:17, Gerhard Sonnabend wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Hi ! >>>>>> >>>>>>The second match is closed. >>>>>>(I only post the short tables here) >>>>>> >>>>>>Could any chessprogram profit from longer/shorter levels ? >>>>>> >>>>>>At the moment i carry out an experiment to find out if there are chessengines >>>>>>which profit from shorter or longer (time)levels more than other engines. >>>>>>Played on a P4-1600 / 64MB HTs / 4-TBs / ponder=off >>>>>>with the "Noomen" (A-H) (=160 games every match) under the ChessBase-Fritz7-GUI. >>>>>> >>>>>>Completed are: >>>>>>Shredder 7.04 vs Junior 8.0.0.2 >>>>>> Total (+ 1/2 -) >>>>>> 5min/game 98.5-61.5 (87-23-50) >>>>>> 10min/game 94.0-66.0 (76-36-48) >>>>>> 30min/game 92.5-67.5 (70-45-45) >>>>>>120min/game 89.5-70.5 (65-49-46) >>>>>> >>>>>>and: >>>>>> >>>>>>Shredder 7.0(CB) vs Fritz 8.0.0.5 >>>>>> Total (+ 1/2 -) >>>>>> 5min/game 63.0-97.0 (40-46-74) >>>>>> 10min/game 68.0-92.0 (49-38-73) >>>>>> 30min/game 72.5-87.5 (47-51-62) >>>>>>120min/game 68.5-91.5 (43-51-66) >>>>>> >>>>>>The current matches is (after 120 games per Level): >>>>>>Chess Tiger 15.0(CB) "Normal" vs Beta-WIN-Rebel 12 (style=Test12a) >>>>>> Total (+ 1/2 -) >>>>>> 5min/game 83.0-37.0 (68-30-22) >>>>>> 10min/game 80.0-40.0 (63-34-23) >>>>>> 30min/game 68.5-51.5 (48-41-31) >>>>>>120min/game 65.5-54.5 (41-49-30) >>>>>>(Played on a Cel. 1.8GHz / 128MB HTs / ...the rest look above) >>>>>> >>>>>>The details and the games can be found on: >>>>>>www.pcschach.de >>>>>> >>>>>>Best G.S. >>>>> >>>>>nice tests! shredder vs junior and CT15 vs rebel 12 beta at least show trends of >>>>>favoring one program at short and another program at long time control. >>>>> >>>>>this seems quite natural to me. if one program has better move ordering than >>>>>another it will do better at longer time controls, since better MO is an >>>>>exponential gain. i have seen this behavior in my checkers program in matches >>>>>against another program - mine does better at longer time controls. and, since i >>>>>know the other programmer well, i also know that i spend a lot more time on move >>>>>ordering. so i'm not really surprised about my checkers result. i'm more >>>>>surprised that some people don't want to believe that this effect exists :-) >>>>> >>>>>cheers >>>>> martin >>>> >>>>So what would happen if you took Shredder vs Junior & CT15 vs Rebel 12 beta and >>>>played them at G/120 minutes on a 286-12Mhz cpu ?? >>> >>> >>>I guess the results would be similar to the 5min/game listed above. >>> >>>/Mikael >> >>Hi Mikael ! >> >>I'dont think so. Playing 5m/g it can happen all what you think about or not. >>Playing games with 5 or 10m/g is nonsense. I've seen games on this level where >>one engine has had +7.00 or more and less moves later this engine lost the game >>(not on time) !!! >>The MHz of the CPU isn't important. With longer time control i've never >>seen such unusual behavior. >>I think that the result on "this" 286-12MHz and 120m/g would bring >>the same result as my match on the P4 on this level ! >> >>Best G.S. > > > > >Hi Gerhard! > >The time ratio between 120m/g and 5m/g is 24. > >If cpu mhz would be the only thing which affects NPS (and depth), a CPU with 75 >Mhz (1800/24) would play a 120m/g precisely the way a 1800Mhz cpu plays a 5m/g. > >The reason you have seen losses from +7 scores is because the engine did not >calculate deep enough. An engine on a slow CPU would not see deep enough even >with 120m/g. > >Mhz matters, Hi Mikael ! MHz matters, but equal for both engines ! Best G.S.
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.