Author: Gregor Overney
Date: 22:18:37 06/02/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 02, 1999 at 15:13:58, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On June 01, 1999 at 20:30:36, Gregor Overney wrote: > >>It is a combination of the things: code changes (such as in evaluate.c), number >>of processors involved, choice of OS, choice of compiler etc. >> >>It appears like searching a global minimum in a configuration space with lots of >>tempting local minima. One slight change, and the search may be unsuccessful. >> >>FEN 8/k7/3p4/p2P1p2/P2P1P2/8/8/K7 w - - 0 1 works on some people's Linux box >>using mt=2 and 16.8 (ply = 22) and shows up much later under NT 4 (using mt=2 >>and 16.8). >> >>But it is an interesting example to proof the point that "things" on NT and >>LINUX are handled differently enough that they cause different results for >>identical input and source code. Is it VC++ or just the way NT is designed? >> >>Gregor > > >Not _just_ NT vs Linux. I get significant variability on the same hardware, >the same position, the same everything. Because the parallel search is highly >non-deterministic. NT isn't the problem at all. IT seems to do the SMP stuff >quite well in fact... Just for your info: 16.9 is working fine with FEN 8/k7/3p4/p2P1p2/P2P1P2/8/8/K7 w - - 0 1 (mt=1 _and_ mt=2) on NT 4. I am running a couple of games 16.6 vs 16.9, all with 40/30'. I should get some results tomorrow.
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.