Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: perft records

Author: Reinhard Scharnagl

Date: 06:32:01 09/06/04

Go up one level in this thread

On September 06, 2004 at 09:21:36, Peter Fendrich wrote:

>On September 06, 2004 at 09:06:06, Reinhard Scharnagl wrote:
>>On September 06, 2004 at 07:43:51, Peter Fendrich wrote:
>>>What free programs have the fastest perft and what are the figures?
>>>Please, If you give figures also add processor, compiler and environment!
>>>I want to compare with a new concept that isn't coded yet...
>>Hi Peter,
>>see some of my (Smirf) results (still improved after measuring) at:
>>a) without TT: []
>>b) with    TT: []
>>Regards, Reinhard.

>Hi Reinhard,

Hi Peter,

>I'm not sure how to read this. A few questions:
>It says break time 75 sec but in the table I find 166 sec. Is it 166 that
>I should count as the ply 7 result?

Break time does mean that the test run will be stopped, when calculating a
single Perft ply has used that time or more.

>That will get 3195901860/166 = 19252421 n/sec  Correct?
>Pretty fast!
>What environment/platform?

(Pentium P4 2.79 GHz, MS VStudio C++ Compiler)

>Finally, is this a MoveGen that you can use in normal play or do you have "perft
>tricks" in it (such as not doing MakeMove in the leaves and just count the moves
>in the move list)?

I do not know what you are thinking of. You can see that I am also are counting
mates, which have to be detected first. But indeed, I have a move-generator
which produces fully informed moves (capture, e.p., check, double check,
mate ...). So using that hardly calculated information for to optimize perft is
no cheating. I think, that using a pseudolegal move generator is a trick


Regards, Reinhard.

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.