Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 13:24:39 04/30/04
Go up one level in this thread
On April 30, 2004 at 14:42:29, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On April 30, 2004 at 13:44:17, Ingo Bauer wrote: > >>On April 30, 2004 at 13:36:44, Ingo Bauer wrote: >> >>>On April 30, 2004 at 09:53:01, Karl-Johan Olsen wrote: >>> >>>>btw. it's in the classical interface... >>> >>>Hi >>> >>>I never checked this and can't at the moment (will later) but it is completly >>>useless. 64 is more than enough, let the OS do the caching job! >>> >>>Bye >>>Ingo >> >>OK, I could not wait: >> >>CPU0: AuthenticAMD x86 Family 6 Model 10 Stepping 0 2505 MHz >>GUI: Tablebases with 5 pieces found! [Cache: 999 MB + internal 13.67 MB] >>Engine: Shredder 8 (64 MB) >>by Stefan Meyer-Kahlen >> 4/04 0:00 +M11 1.Ne6 Rg6 (95) 5 >>best move: Nc7-e6 time: 0:00.016 min n/s: 7.687 CPU 93.7% n/s(1CPU): 8.203 >>nodes: 123 TB: 174 >> >>There seems to be a limitation of 999 MB for the TBs Cache, and the 5 Pcs at >>least are working fine. But again 999 is completly useless! The OS is doing the >>caching job allready. Use a bit more for Engine-Hash and let 100-200 MB Memory >>free for the OS. Done! >> >>Ingo >> >>Ingo > >The OS might cache it Ingo, but won't decompress it for you which also takes >quite some time. A bigger EGTB cache works better than letting the OS find the >golden coins. > >Best regards, >Vincent Current egtb cache caches compressed blocks. So this is a moot point. Decompression is _not_ the bottleneck. From actual testing rather than guessing...
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.