Author: Slater Wold
Date: 22:18:03 12/12/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 13, 2003 at 01:09:41, Aaron Gordon wrote: >On December 12, 2003 at 23:31:41, Slater Wold wrote: > >>On December 12, 2003 at 21:37:14, Aaron Gordon wrote: >> >>>On December 12, 2003 at 20:09:23, Slater Wold wrote: >>> >>>>On December 12, 2003 at 17:26:04, Aaron Gordon wrote: >>>> >>>>>I was wondering if it may be better to track the stats by trillions of moves >>>>>done instead of on a block by block basis. Because the current way doesn't seem >>>>>as if it'd be completely fair. For example.. lets say computer X is twice as >>>>>fast as computer Y. However, computer Y completes two smaller blocks in the same >>>>>time it takes computer X to do one. Now the stats report that computer Y has >>>>>done two blocks, looking like it is twice as fast as computer X when actually >>>>>the reverse is true. Just something to think about. Thanks for the project, I >>>>>always love the distributed stuff. :) >>>> >>>>Good point. My P4 2.0Ghz laptop worked on the same problem (set) for 6 hours... >>>> >>>>My P4 3.06Ghz finished one in 20 minutes. >>> >>>Seems my computers are getting the longer problems now.. that what you're >>>seeing? Even with one of my 2.5's pulling 230,000knps I'm getting 3000-4000 >>>second (last one was 3460 seconds) blocks. >> >>Last problem: >> >>97096137599 nodes in 624.76 seconds (155412Knps). >> >>I was doing a bunch of other stuff while this one was running. Probably would >>have only taken 400s - 500s at full speed. > >Hmm.. bad luck for me then I guess. It's going full speed.. I'm just getting the >HUGE blocks for some reason. Cause you're the fastest!! :) Last problem - 209997536959 nodes in 1430.67 seconds (146782 KNPS)
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.