Author: Matthew Hull
Date: 10:29:01 03/03/05
Go up one level in this thread
On March 03, 2005 at 13:14:27, Dann Corbit wrote: >On March 03, 2005 at 09:41:14, Matthew Hull wrote: > >>On March 03, 2005 at 08:49:08, Andrew Wagner wrote: >> >>>This is an impressive result. Did you tinker with GNUChess' code at all? What >>>opening book are you using? It didn't look like it out-booked crafty. Any >>>thoughts on why it performed so well? >> >> >>This GNUChess is stock. The book is also the stock GNUDhess book (which took >>all night to process from the 160,000 pgn file, BTW). >> >>The only tweak I did was to implement GCC PGO profiling. This mormally breaks, >>but for some reason, it works on my old PIII 500mhz desktop (RH9). So I built >>it with PGO on the old machine and now run it on the less-old machine. :) >> >>Perhaps someone who has studied GNUChess 5.07 can contribute more on it's level >>of sophistication. It seems to be basically sound, but not a particularly deep >>searcher. A 64 bit machine might give it a significant speedup, since it is a >>bitboard program. >> >>To be fair, I've suspected that Crafty has some kind of "hole" in it somewhere, >>since 19.15. It plays the endgames better than it has ever played them, but >>sometimes it loses it's way in the middlegame. Just an "impression" from >>watching many games it's played on ICC. > >I would not take too much from two games at high speed. > >If GnuChess wins in a tournament of 30 games, then it is time to raise the >eyebrows. I agree completely. But it is rather lucky that this account has played crafty on ICC exactly twice with a non-insignificant hardware disadvantage.
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.