Author: Joachim Rang
Date: 05:32:40 06/21/05
Go up one level in this thread
On June 21, 2005 at 08:26:26, M Hurd wrote: >On June 21, 2005 at 08:18:49, Joachim Rang wrote: > >>On June 21, 2005 at 02:54:06, m.d.hurd wrote: >> >>>Just for fun I set Fruit 2.1 standard versus Fruit 2.1 with Futility and Delta >>>pruning switched on. >>> >>>2 rounds of 5 games at game in 30 minutes. 128 kb cache for each engine using >>>the supplied book_small.bin >>> >>>I wanted to see how differently they played and whether the extra settings made >>>much difference. >>> >>>10 games is obviously not enough to say one way or another, however maybe >>>someone would like to test this further. >>> >>>For some strange reason I called the Fruit 2.1 with the extra settings Fruit 2.1 >>>vr/dp, anyway .... >>> >>>The games were run on a single AMD 2400 XP with 1 gb memory. >>> >>>Round one Fruit 2.1 vr/dp scored 3.5 and Fruit 2.1 standard 1.5 >>> >>>Round two Fruit 2.1 vr/dp scored 3.5 and Fruit 2.1 standard 1.5 >>> >>>Total 7 points out of 10 for Fruit with the extra settings. >>> >>>Fruit 2.1 standard settings never won a game. >>> >>>If anyone wants the pgn just let me know. >>> >>>Regards >>> >>>Mike. >> >> >>Prior to release 2.0 I tested it thoroughly. Ater 400 games it scored about 10 >>Elopoints better than without futility and delta pruning. It did very well in >>Testsuitesthough. Fabien decided against it, since 10 Elopoints were too small >>to be sure that it helps and since I had only data for very fast blitz and the >>new history pruning was a clear improvement. I think it is a bit more likely >>that it helps than that it hurt but the difference will be small (10 Elopoints. >> >>Perhaps someone will make a really significant test sometimes? >> >>regards Joachim > > > >Perhaps the guys at CEGT can help with this, I believe they are currently >testing the standard version now. In some of the games it looks as though the >nodes per second drops with futility and delta pruning but i guess its looking >deeper perhaps. > >Regards > >Mike yes it is unavoidable that nps drops by 5-10% iirc, but it saves more nodes so in the end it looks deeper. The questions is: Does the additional depth ouweigh the mistakes of the pruning? It seems the difference is quite small. regards Joachim
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.