Author: Harald Faber
Date: 02:34:36 03/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 15, 2004 at 01:30:55, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >Hi John >Comparing the results: >CM9 vs Tao 5.6 (ponder=off) 13,5-6,5 >CM9 vs Tao 5.6 (ponder=on) 15,0-5,0 >we see (as usual) no significant difference as far as results are concerned >whether playing with ponder on/off and that's why I do no longer see any >reason to use two PC's for computer matches. True, the games are not the >same but this "disadvantage" is overcompensated by the fact that you can >play much more games with two computers. And in this way you have statistically >spoken more reliable results. >Kurt A) It is well-known that CM uses clearly more than 50% of the CPU. So when pb-on and pb-off do not make any difference in CPU usage of about 90% by theKing, I do not see why Tao could/should perform better with pb. B) Maybe Tao is not the right opponent -> much too weak IMO. C) Do you remember the good results of Ruffian without pb and the much worse results WITH pb? So pb does not play a role? I wish it would not, but it *does*. It is always best to have *physically seperated* systems so that none of the programs/engines absolutely has no influence on the other one which IS likely when they use the same CPU, RAM etc. I am amazed that you as experienced tester don't understand that.
This page took 0.01 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.