Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 07:13:18 12/20/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 20, 2003 at 08:43:37, Thomas Mayer wrote: >Hi Vincent, > >>I did 2 experiments: >> >>experiment A) I ran diep at 460 processors with 115MB hashtable *in total* >>experiment B) Same diep version at 460 processors with 115GB hashtables. >> >>Note hashtable means transpositiontable here. Each processor had local 4.2MB >>pawnhashtable and each processor had local 32MB evaluation table. >> >>MB = 10^6 , GB = 10^9 >>#probes = 4 >>entrysize = 16 bytes >>position = r4rk1/p1q1nppp/b2b4/2nP4/1P3p2/P1N2N2/B1P3PP/R1BQK2R w KQ - >> >>What is the expected outcome? > >well, there are several unclear facts - e.g. how to usage of 460 processors is >different to the usage of 1 processor etc. > >Anyway, let's try a guess and take the idea of Christoph Theron that hashtable >doubling is about 7 Elo... We have 10 doublings, so 70 Elos expected... Doubling >in speed is expected with around 60 Elos... So I expect a speedup of about >120-150%... How far am I away ?! :) > >Greets, Thomas i don't want any elo answer, that's bullshit of course. Above 12 ply (without forward pruning and with some extensions and checks in qsearch) another ply matters shit. The question asked here is: "what does it matter for search depth".
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.