Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 10:15:28 02/08/06
Go up one level in this thread
On February 08, 2006 at 04:43:48, Uri Blass wrote: [snip] >I agree until here except one thing. > >I do not know nothing about the real nps of rybka except the fact that they are >manipulated so I do not know if it is relatively fast in nodes per second. > >I only know that it does not report correct number. > >> >>It's clear Rybka relies much more on search than eval. > >Here I do not agree and I think that rybka has both good search and good >evaluation. > >You cannot be at the top without good evaluation. I do not think we can say anything about Rybka NPS reporting until Vasik Rajlich gives us his working definition of a node. I would be pretty astonished if he is intentionally giving us bad numbers. I see two possibilities: 1. He has a bug in his node computation. 2. He counts nodes differently than other people do. I think a conspiracy of false reporting has a probablility of about .000001%
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.