Author: Jaime Benito de Valle Ruiz
Date: 04:52:51 06/19/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 18, 2004 at 23:55:53, Cesar Contreras wrote: >Hi > >I'm stuck with my program "ajedrez tactico", so i'm planing a complete rewrite, >i have the dream of creating a top class chess engine, i think i can. I have >many ideas in my mind, but a fundamental decision i have to make it's to chose >the board representation: Bitboards or 0x88 or anyother? > >Currently i use a 64 bytes array with a Mailbox move scheme, that's why i think >i could be more confortable with 0x88, but i don't know if this it's good >enought to make a top class chess program. Are there many (or any) class >programs that currently use 0x88? Read carefully what Dann has written below: The choice of board representation is not the key factor in a strong program. There are top program using both methods (and maybe a combination of both?). Speed is important, but if your move generator is very fast, but your evaluation is not good, and your search methods are not effective, you'll be stuck with low depths no matter how fast your computer is. If you manage to get an effective branching factor of two (or less), every time you double the speed of the computer, you get an extra ply, but if you have a high branching factor, most speed improvements will have a negligible impact on the program's strength. Look at Shredder: Low knps, but very high depths. I've had to re-write my program several times trying lots of methods to realize that I must concentrate on getting it to play good chess before optimize it. Try debugging your program too; those omnipresent bugs will cause your program to play bad. Good luck, Jaime >Maybe it's an already answered question, but i'm new to this forum, so if you >don't want to waste much time, just post your choice (like a poll): Bitboards or >0x88? > >Thank you in advance.
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.