Author: James T. Walker
Date: 14:11:27 06/14/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 14, 1999 at 13:31:56, Dave Gomboc wrote: >On June 14, 1999 at 12:45:49, James T. Walker wrote: > >>On June 14, 1999 at 00:15:00, Dave Gomboc wrote: >> >>>On June 13, 1999 at 23:44:04, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>On June 13, 1999 at 18:53:37, Tomas Casanovas Martinez wrote: >>>> >>>>>...sorry, Mel. I forgot to say that both programmes play with 32 M. hash tables. >>>> >>>>Tomas, >>>> >>>>If you read the Fritz manual, you should know the formula for HT size. 32 megs >>>>for Fritz is less than half what he needs on your processor. Fritz needs more >>>>than 72 megs on your hardware if you're testing at 40/2? I forgot to look back >>>>but if you're testing at 40/2, then that's another problem besides using the >>>>wrong book. >>>> >>>>Mel >>> >>>Let's keep things straight here: it's a problem with Fritz, not his computer. >>> >>>For instance: Fritz is playing the GMs on a quad machine with 4 gigs of ram. >>>I'm sure that in 10 years we'll all think that 4 gigs is peanuts, but today the >>>story is different. Meanwhile, those of us in reality with a limited paycheque >>>will notice that other chess software doesn't ask for a similar amount of >>>memory, and send the complaints to where they belong. >>> >>>Dave >> >>Sorry Dave but I don't understand your complaint! The fact that Fritz requires >>more RAM than most other programs is not a downside. It's the way Fritz was >>designed and is not a problem. If you can't give Fritz the RAM it needs to >>perform up to design then it's your fault not Fritz's. You can use that as an > >The amount of RAM it needs is unreasonably large. If it is not able to cope >well with less RAM, then it is a bad implementation. If it is able to cope well >with less RAM, then comments about "you should have given it 150 megs!" are >ridiculous. Your choice. > *********** "Unreasonably large" is only your opinion not a fact. *********** "Ridiculous" is also only your opinion not a fact. *********** >>excuse when Fritz doesn't perform but it's not Fritz's fault it doesn't have the >>RAM it needs. When you purchase Fritz you understand what it needs to perform >>at it's best. So you either give it what it takes or settle for less than > >Really? How does the general user (who is not a computer chess freak) know >about this before they buy? > ************* Most Fritz users are not ignorant about the program. The ones that are probably will not mind that it is performing at about 95% instead of 100%. ************ >>optimum performance from an excellent program. I run Fritz on a K6-2-400 with >>256 Meg RAM and it performs very well against Junior/Crafty. I'm still waiting >>for Hiarcs (It's in the mail) but hope to do my own test when it arrives. I >>admit that even with 256 meg ram, Fritz sometimes hits %100 of hashtable usage >>at 40/2. That's my fault! > >So what? Hitting 100% of hashtable use is normal in computer chess. A program >should be able to play well even with a saturated hash table. If it doesn't, >then its position replacement scheme needs improvement. ******** I only mention this to indicate that even 256 meg may not keep Fritz from hitting 100%. I never said it would not "play well" when it does hit 100%. As far as I can tell it can hit 100% and still search pretty effectively for a few more ply. ******** > >>Jim Walker > >Dave
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.