Author: Gregory Owett
Date: 11:23:44 11/04/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 04, 2005 at 07:13:03, Chessfun wrote: >On November 04, 2005 at 06:04:34, Greg Simpson wrote: > >>Tablebase access can easily saturate the disk IO, so having two engines using >>them at once could be a problem. You could buy a small second hard disk and >>store a copy of the tablebases there and avoid this problem by directing one >>engine to use the tablebases on the main disk and the other the tablebases on >>the secondary disk. >> >>Other than tablebases, there should be some slow down from memory bus contention >>when two engines are running, mostly from hash table access I guess (hard to >>cache). I don't think think this would be a big issue for the X2 processors, >>but like you I would be interested if anyone could provide some real data. >> >>If you don't want to run ponder on you could get a bigger benefit from the dual >>core system by running two matches at once. > >That is exactly what I am doing right now x2 4200+. Except with tablebases I >have identical 5 piece placed on the same drive. C:\Nalimov and C:\Nalimov 1 >told each program in options where to go and thus far no problem. Originally >probing the same folder C:\Nalimov was a problem. > >Haven't noticed any other problems. If the two interfaces are CB then you need >to install the path to bases different naturally when installing the software, >so you'll end up with two locations where the tournaments or matches are taking >place. > >Sarah. Hello Sarah, In my opinion, in the event of tournament this solution can also not function. Obviously, always on "ponder on". Don't you think so? Gregory
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.