Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Hiarcs 9 Speedup, but I don't see why it makes it better???

Author: Kurt Utzinger

Date: 23:00:55 09/14/04

Go up one level in this thread


On September 14, 2004 at 20:45:26, Derek Paquette wrote:

>On most programs, the time it takes to reach the next ply, is usually double
>what it took to reach the previous, so it looks something like this,
>
>atleast with shredder and fritz
>
>10ply = 40 sec
>11 ply = 1:20
>12 ply = 2:40
>
>etc.
>
>Of course this isn't the exact number but it is generally double, however with
>Hiarcs 9, it seems to be almost a 5x increase per depth, almost 6 in some cases.
>
>So my question is, WHY would a faster cpu make it much stronger, unless of
>course the cpu was 5x faster, (hiarcs to remind you is not a multiprocessor
>program)
>
>So if I'm searching to depth 12 in 3 minutes,
>but I wouldn't reach depth 13 for atleast 14 minutes, why would i need a faster
>cpu? its still going to be stuck on the first calculated move for along time,
>
>it doesnt make sense to me, perhaps I am not understanding something critical,
>
>Also, what word have we the community received about Hiarcs 10 on PC.
>
>Gixxer(the user name) on playserver was VERY active about 4 months ago, I have
>not seen him in along time.
>
>Any word on this new program?
>He estimated that Hiarcs10 would be 50 elo stronger than hiarcs9, that would put
>it 21 elo LOWER than shredder 8 currently on the SSDF,
>
>So I wonder, is Hiarcs10 being delayed until they can push it well beyond 50
>elo, so they aren't releasing something that will be even weaker than Junior8?
>or DF8? a program that would be a generation BEHIND?
>
>These questions I would like answered, as I am a big Hiarcs fan, although my
>fanboyism is dwindling as they have not kept us up to date, and that the
>performance of the engine might start to turn into a 'second rate' engine as it
>cannot keep up with the top dogs, although this is all speculation, and I hope
>non of it is true.
>
>Derek Paquette (check my website in two days, for the new opening book, with
>fixed 1.d4 lines)
>www.geocities.com/theupandup22


       Is the following not a counter-example of your theory?
       Analysis on P4 1.8/32 MB hash.
       Kurt

[Event "Angriff"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2000.??.??"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Opfer"]
[Black "1.Sxg6"]
[Result "1-0"]
[Annotator "FCP Forum: TL"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "1r1r1b1k/1bpq2pp/p4p2/P2np2P/1pBP3N/2P5/1P1B1PP1/R2QR1K1 w - - 0 1"]
[PlyCount "11"]
[EventDate "2000.??.??"]

1. Ng6+ hxg6 2. hxg6 Qf5 3. Bd3 Nxc3 4. bxc3 Bf3 5. Bxf5 Bxd1 6. Raxd1 {
and White wins a piece} 1-0

Opfer - 1.Sxg6
[D]1r1r1b1k/1bpq2pp/p4p2/P2np2P/1pBP3N/2P5/1P1B1PP1/R2QR1K1 w - - 0 1

Analysis by Hiarcs 9:

1.dxe5 fxe5 2.Rxe5
  +-  (1.43)   Depth: 1/8   00:00:00
1.dxe5 fxe5 2.Rxe5
  ±  (1.10)   Depth: 2/11   00:00:00
1.dxe5 Bc5
  ±  (1.10)   Depth: 2/11   00:00:00
1.dxe5 Bc5
  ±  (1.35)   Depth: 3/12   00:00:00
1.dxe5 fxe5 2.cxb4 Be7 3.Nf3
  ±  (1.35)   Depth: 3/12   00:00:00
1.dxe5 fxe5 2.Qc2 Qe8 3.Be2
  ±  (1.23)   Depth: 4/16   00:00:00

1.dxe5 bxc3 2.Bxc3 fxe5 3.Rxe5 Nxc3 4.Qxd7 Rxd7
  ±  (1.13)   Depth: 5/16   00:00:00  26kN

1.dxe5 Nxc3 2.Bxc3 bxc3 3.Qxd7 Rxd7 4.bxc3 fxe5 5.Rxe5
  ±  (1.13)   Depth: 6/18   00:00:01  83kN

1.dxe5 Nxc3 2.Bxc3 bxc3 3.Qxd7 Rxd7 4.bxc3 fxe5 5.Rxe5
  ±  (0.88)   Depth: 7/22   00:00:01  143kN
1.dxe5 Nxc3 2.Bxc3 Qxd1 3.Raxd1 Rxd1 4.Rxd1 bxc3 5.bxc3 fxe5
  ²  (0.54)   Depth: 7/22   00:00:01  170kN

1.dxe5 Nxc3 2.Bxc3 Qxd1 3.Raxd1 Rxd1 4.Rxd1 bxc3 5.bxc3 fxe5 6.Rd7
  ±  (0.72)   Depth: 8/23   00:00:06  793kN

1.dxe5 Nxc3 2.Bxc3 Qxd1 3.Raxd1 Rxd1 4.Rxd1 bxc3 5.bxc3 fxe5 6.Rd7
  ²  (0.47)   Depth: 9/28   00:00:12  1586kN
1.dxe5 Nxc3 2.Bxc3 Qxd1 3.Raxd1 Rxd1 4.Rxd1 bxc3 5.bxc3 fxe5 6.Rd7 Bd6
  ²  (0.46)   Depth: 9/28   00:00:13  1696kN

1.dxe5 Nxc3 2.Bxc3 Qxd1 3.Raxd1 Rxd1 4.Rxd1 bxc3 5.bxc3 fxe5 6.Rd7 Bd6
  ±  (0.71)   Depth: 10/29   00:00:51  6511kN
1.dxe5 Nxc3 2.Bxc3 Qxd1 3.Raxd1 bxc3
  ±  (0.75)   Depth: 10/29   00:00:58  7567kN

1.dxe5 Nxc3 2.Bxc3 Qxd1 3.Raxd1 bxc3 4.Rxd8 Rxd8 5.bxc3 fxe5 6.Nf3 Bxf3 7.gxf3
  ²  (0.60)   Depth: 11/32   00:02:20  18404kN
1.Ng6+ hxg6
  ²  (0.61)   Depth: 11/38   00:05:09  40367kN
1.Ng6+ hxg6
  ±  (1.00)   Depth: 11/38   00:05:36  43550kN
1.Ng6+ hxg6 2.hxg6 Qf5 3.Bd3 Nxc3 4.bxc3 e4 5.Rxe4 Bxe4 6.Bxe4 Qb5 7.Qg4
  ±  (1.08)   Depth: 11/38   00:06:08  47626kN

1.Ng6+ hxg6 2.hxg6 Qf5 3.Bd3 Nxc3 4.bxc3 e4 5.Rxe4 Bxe4 6.Bxe4 Qb5 7.Qg4
  ±  (1.33)   Depth: 12/39   00:08:17  62580kN
1.Ng6+ hxg6 2.hxg6 Qf5 3.Bd3 Nxc3 4.bxc3 e4 5.Rxe4 Bxe4 6.Bxe4
  +-  (1.46)   Depth: 12/40   00:09:46  73099kN

1.Ng6+ hxg6 2.hxg6 Nf4 3.Bxf4 Qf5 4.Re3 Bd5 5.Rh3+ Kg8 6.Bxd5+ Rxd5 7.Qh5 Qxh5
8.Rxh5 Bd6 9.dxe5 Bxe5 10.Bxe5
  +-  (1.53)   Depth: 13/41   00:21:34  163632kN

(Utzinger, MyTown 15.09.2004)




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.