Author: Uri Blass
Date: 15:27:19 10/06/05
Go up one level in this thread
On October 06, 2005 at 18:20:19, chandler yergin wrote: >On October 06, 2005 at 02:37:34, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On October 06, 2005 at 02:13:50, Lance Perkins wrote: >> >>>On October 05, 2005 at 21:03:11, Will Singleton wrote: >>> >>>>A comp played this move against my comp on ICC today, took less than 30 secs. >>>>Can any program find it as fast? >>>> >>>>[d]3rn1k1/2qbrp1p/1p1ppnpQ/p5NP/1PP1P3/P1N4R/4BPP1/3R2K1 w - - bm Rdd3 >>> >>>Need 42 secs... >>> >>>Thinker 5.0c on a 2.4ghz AMD >>> 8 99 145 1347078 h5g6 f7g6 d1d2 >>> 8 105 186 1649244 h3h4 d7c6 e2g4 c7c8 >>> 9 108 848 7140678 f2f4 a5b4 a3b4 d7c6 e2g4 >>>10 96 1787 14663556 h5g6 f7g6 h3h4 d7c6 e2d3 >>>10 99 2037 16294503 h3h4 d7c6 d1d2 a5b4 h5g6 >>>10 162 4246 29903901 d1d3 d6d5 c4d5 >> >>congratulations. >> >>42*2.4/2=50.4 seconds >> >>50.4*32=1608.3 >> >>Thinker is more than 32 times faster than Fruit2.2 that still does not find it >>after more than 35 minutes on my A3000(2ghz) after searching more than 1,300,000 >>Knodes >> >>If you can only be more than 32 times faster than Fruit2.2 in every position >>then thinker may be more than 200 elo better than Fruit2.2 >> >>Note that Fruit2.2's behaviour is interesring. >>At depth 15 it seems to be hypnotized by Rd3 >>It cannot be convinced to play it but also cannot leave analyzing this move. >> >>Here is Fruit2.2's output(after 35 minutes of analysis) >?????????? >Bottom Line.. Looks like 1 Min 48 sec? > +- (1.81) Depth: 15/52 00:01:48 67203kN Yes In 35 minutes of analysis the last output was after 1:48 minutes. Next output after that outpur was only after more than 50 minutes. Uri
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.