Author: Kurt Utzinger
Date: 07:30:04 01/25/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 24, 2004 at 17:29:38, Ingo Bauer wrote:
>Hi
>
>Ups, Kurt you are right! You hit a sweet spot with this 32 MB Hash (one of the
>few!)
>
>Here is mine with 32 MB. Identical to yours.
>
>Ingo
>
>
>5k1r/1b1r1ppB/2qN2P1/p2nP3/1p3n1Q/8/PPP2R1P/1K1R4 w - -
>
>Engine: Shredder 8 (32 MB)
>by Stefan Meyer-Kahlen
>
>10/31 0:01 +0.90 1.Re1 f6 2.Rxf4 Nxf4 3.Qxf4 Ba6 4.h3 Qd5
> 5.Ka1 Re7 6.Qxf6+ gxf6 7.g7+ Kxg7
> 8.exf6+ Kxh7 (532.645) 470
>
>11/31 0:02 +1.15++ 1.Re1 f6 2.Rxf4 Nxf4 3.Qxf4 Ba6
> 4.Qd4 Rxd6 5.Qxd6+ Ke8 6.Qxc6+ Kd8
> 7.Qxa6 (1.074.777) 474
>
>11/31 0:02 +1.15 1.Re1 Rxd6 2.exd6 Qxd6 3.gxf7 Bc6
> 4.Rg1 Qe7 5.Rxf4 Nxf4 6.Qxf4 Rxh7
> 7.Qb8+ Kxf7 8.Qe8+ Bxe8 (1.453.590) 488
>
>12/39 0:04 +0.90-- 1.Re1 Rxd6 2.exd6 Qxd6 3.gxf7 Bc6
> 4.Rg1 a4 5.Rg4 Nc3+ 6.bxc3 Qd1+
> 7.Kb2 bxc3+ 8.Kxc3 Rxh7 9.Rfxf4 Rxh4
> 10.Rxh4 (2.305.059) 486
>
>12/39 0:06 +0.41 1.Re1 Rxd6 2.exd6 Qxd6 3.gxf7 Bc6
> 4.Ref1 a4 5.Kc1 a3 6.Rxf4 Nxf4
> 7.Qd8+ Qxd8 8.Rxf4 (3.169.677) 493
>
>12/39 0:08 +0.42++ 1.Rdf1 Ba6 2.Re1 f6 3.Rxf4 Nxf4
> 4.Qxf4 Rxd6 5.exd6 Rxh7 (4.301.595) 489
>
>12/39 0:09 +0.77++ 1.Rdf1 Ba6 2.Re1 f6 3.Rxf4 Nxf4
> 4.Qxf4 Qd5 5.Qf2 Rc7 6.h4 Re7 7.Qb6 Bb7 (4.667.469) 491
>
>12/39 0:09 +0.77 1.Rdf1 Ba6 2.Re1 f6 3.Rxf4 Nxf4
> 4.Qxf4 Qd5 5.Qf2 Rc7 6.h4 Re7 7.Qb6 Bb7 (4.862.409) 491
>
>13/39 0:16 +0.54 1.Rdf1 Ba6 2.Re1 f6 3.Rxf4 Nxf4
> 4.Qxf4 Qd5 5.Qf2 Bc4 6.Qb6 Bxa2+
> 7.Ka1 fxe5 8.Rf1+ Ke7 (7.960.636) 481
>
>13/43 0:25 +0.55++ 1.Rxf4 Nxf4 2.Qxf4 Qe4 3.Qc1 Qh4
> 4.Qe3 Qxh2 5.Qc5 Rg8 6.Bxg8 (12.050.169) 479
>
>13/43 0:26 +0.90++ 1.Rxf4 Nxf4 2.Qxf4 Qe4 3.Qc1 Qh4
> 4.Qe3 Qxh2 5.Qc5 Rg8 6.Bxg8 (12.489.122) 480
>
>13/43 0:28 +0.90 1.Rxf4 Nxf4 2.Qxf4 Qe4 3.Qc1 Qg4
> 4.Rd3 Qg2 5.e6 fxe6 6.Qf4+ Ke7
> 7.Nf5+ exf5 8.Qe5+ Kd8 9.Rxd7+ Kxd7
> 10.Qxg7+ Ke6 11.Qc3 (13.555.954) 481
>
>14/40 0:36 +0.80 1.Rxf4 Nxf4 2.Qxf4 Qf3 3.Qc1 Qg4
> 4.Rd3 Qe2 5.Nxb7 Rxb7 6.Rd8+ Ke7
> 7.Rxh8 Qxc2+ 8.Kxc2 (17.416.886) 478
>
>14/42 0:41 +0.81++ 1.Rdf1 Ba6 2.Re1 f6 3.Rxf4 Nxf4
> 4.Qxf4 Qd5 (20.048.875) 479
>
>14/44 0:45 +1.16++ 1.Rdf1 Ba6 2.Re1 f6 3.Rxf4 Nxf4
> 4.Qxf4 Qd5 5.Nf7 Rxf7 6.gxf7 Rxh7
> 7.e6 Qd8 8.e7+ Kxf7 9.exd8Q (21.776.188) 481
>
>14/44 0:49 +1.16 1.Rdf1 Ba6 2.Re1 f6 3.Rxf4 Nxf4
> 4.Qxf4 Re7 5.e6 Bc8 6.Nxc8 Qxc8
> 7.Qd6 Qc7 8.Qd7 (23.804.184) 481
>
>15/39 1:36 +0.91-- 1.Rdf1 Ba6 2.Re1 Rxd6 3.exd6 Qxd6
> 4.gxf7 Bb5 5.Rg1 Bc6 6.Rff1 Ne2
> 7.Rf6 Qxf6 8.Rxg7 (45.881.992) 477
>
>15/44 1:42 +0.91 1.Rdf1 Ba6 2.Re1 Rxd6 3.exd6 Qxd6
> 4.gxf7 Bb5 5.Rg1 Bc6 6.Ka1 Qf6
> 7.Rxf4 Nxf4 8.Qxf6 Bh1 (49.197.917) 478
>
>15/46 2:41 +0.92++ 1.Rxf4 Nxf4 2.Qxf4 Qf3 3.Qc1 Qg4
> 4.Rd3 Qe2 5.Nxb7 Rxb7 6.Rd8+ Ke7
> 7.Rxh8 (77.281.179) 478
>
>15/46 2:49 +1.27++ 1.Rxf4 Nxf4 2.Qxf4 Qf3 3.Qd4 Be4
> 4.Re1 fxg6 5.Qc5 Rxh7 6.Nxe4+ Re7
> 7.Qxa5 Rxe5 (81.176.966) 478
>
>15/50 3:21 +1.27 1.Rxf4 Nxf4 2.Qxf4 Qf3 3.Qd4 Bc6
> 4.Re1 Qd5 5.Qf2 f6 6.Qb6 Re7 7.Qb8+ Be8 (97.003.927) 481
>
>16/43 4:04 +1.52++ 1.Rxf4 Nxf4 2.Qxf4 Qf3 3.Qd4 Bc6
> 4.Re1 Qd5 5.Qb6 Qd2 6.Rf1 Rb7 7.Nxb7 Qxc2+
> 8.Kxc2 Be4+ (117.609.685) 480
>
>16/43 4:34 +2.02++ 1.Rxf4 Nxf4 2.Qxf4 Qf3 3.Qd4 Ba8
> 4.gxf7 Rxh7 5.e6 Ra7 6.Ne4 Bxe4
> 7.Qd8+ (131.463.347) 479
>
>16/48 6:11 +2.43 1.Rxf4 Nxf4 2.Qxf4 Qf3 3.Qd4 Bc6
> 4.Qg1 Bb5 5.Re1 (182.746.236) 492
>
>best move: Rf2xf4 time: 6:27.297 min n/s: 491.004 CPU 99.9% n/s(1CPU):
>491.495 nodes: 190.164.401
Hi Ingo
I seldom use more than 32 MB hash for
analysis purposes. My experience is
excellent and in most cases better than
with big hash size in relation to finding
moves played in practical play.
Kurt
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.