Author: Derek Paquette
Date: 07:27:08 12/11/04
Go up one level in this thread
On December 11, 2004 at 09:51:34, William Penn wrote: >Shredder 8 tip: use Tablebase subsets > >There is far too much hard drive churning with Shredder 8 as simple endgames >approach. The slowdown is enormous. The kN/s speed may drop to 10% of normal. I >also fear for the life of my hard drive with such constant heavy churning. > >To return my system to sanity, I've developed some subsets of the tablebases >which can generally be used with reasonable demands on my computer system. Of >course the 3-4 piece TBs cause no problems, so can be used anytime. Only the >bigger 5 piece TBs are causing the problem. As a rule of thumb selecting TBs of >about 35MB or less is acceptable, and that comes to about 1GB total TBs. >Selecting TBs of about 70MB or less is sometimes acceptable, and that comes to >about 2.3GB total TBs. Of course the complete 3-4-5 piece TBs come to 7GB total, >but my computer just can't handle them in simpler endgame positions. So there's >no point to even considering the huge 6 piece TB files. > >FYI I'm running an XP 2400+ processor at 2GHz with 1GB RAM. > >It also helps to reduce the hash size. I normally run about 640-768GB hash, and >reducing that to 256MB or 128MB improves the TB access situation. But sometimes >that's just not enough in simpler endgame positions, so a smaller set of TBs >must be used. > >This problem is far less severe with other engines. Shredder 8 is the worst, and >the only engine I've tried that requires this kind of special compensation. I >hope they will fix this in Shredder 9. >WP Strange that it is the ONLY engine that does this, and I agree, although, strange that shredder 8 dominates computer vs computer chess and that it has the strongest endgame of all engines, coicidence?
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.