Author: Uri Blass
Date: 08:08:11 12/20/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 20, 2003 at 10:13:18, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >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". speedup of about 120-150% if you have branching factor of 2.5-3 means almost 1 ply deeper. Uri
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.