Author: Mark Young
Date: 14:49:14 06/27/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 27, 1999 at 17:26:29, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: > >On June 27, 1999 at 15:33:48, Terry Ripple wrote: > >>On June 27, 1999 at 14:00:33, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: >> >>> >>>Does anyone have factual information regarding the reason for both the short and >>>long test? >>> >>>Question #2: How does these tests relate to the playing of a game at 40/2? >>> >>>Question #3: How many of these tests, either short or long are we supposed to >>>run? >>> >>>Question #4: On what criteria do you base your answers to the above? >>> >>>Now, I ran a short test with 32 megs for hash tables and the score was 133 >>>HiarcsMark 39kN/S. When I ran the same test with 64 megs, the score was 131 >>>HiarcsMark 39 kN/S. >>>At 145 megs the score was lower in kN/S and HiarcsMark. >>> >>>When I ran the long test with 32 megs of HT, the score was 280 HiarcsMark with >>>35 kN/S. When I ran the same test with 64 megs for HT, the score was still 280 >>>HiarcsMark but 34kN/S. Please keep in mind that I only ran one test for each >>>set-up. Now, there is absolutely nothing in regards to how these tests relate to >>>actual play or how many tests should be run - with Fritz 5.32 I believe it's all >>>automatic. >>> >>>I thank you in advance for any assistance you can provide. >>> >>>Regards, >>>Mel, Presdent of the Hiarcs Confusion Club. New menbers are welcome. There is no >>>annual membership fee. The only requirement is to own Hiarcs 7.32 and the rest >>>should come naturally. >>-------- >>Hi Mel, >> Did you know that the time control is in direct relation with how many MB of >>Hash Size you use and the speed of your computer is in direct relation with how >>high the KN/S will be! Whats your CPU Speed and total RAM? >> My CPU Speed is a AMD K6-2, 266mhz MMX with 64RAM: My average HI-Mark is 93, >>and i get a 26 KN/S when following the Optimum Hash Size in Configurations. >>For instance, info recommends for Game/60min.= 24MB Hash Size but i get a bit >>better HI-Mark using 18.432MB which gives me a 93 Hi-Mark and 26 KN/S. >>At 30min. it recommends Optimum of 12MB and i use 12.288MB which gives me a - >>94 Hi-Mark with 26 KN/S. >> Now the Confusion Starts: I discovered that if i ignor all the Recommendations >>and set the Hash Size for Only 1 or 2 MB for any Time Control- Setting, i will >>get a Wopping Hi-Mark of 193 and 27 KN/S. >> I got a recommendation to use this Formula: 2 x KN/S x Average Sec.per Move: >>Lets say a time of 40/2hour.= 180 seconds per move in the above formula so here >>we go: 2 x 26 x 180 = 9360 KB = 9.360 MB of Hash Size! I know it seems low but >>don`t forget that Fritz fills up the Hash Table 10 times Faster than Hiarcs does >>and that Optimum Hash recommendation in the Configuration settings was for meant >>for Fritz!! I didn`t mean to cofuse you even more but after all, thats why we >>joined the Confusion Club of Hiarcs!!!!! Ha Ha!! > >Hello Terry, > >You can consider yourself an honary member of the Club. Thanks for adding more >confusion and causing me to take two aspirin. Now, you didn't really address the >questions as to how many of these tests we are supposed to run, I would run it 1 time and then never run it again...unless for some reason you think your computer is running slow for some reason, the hiarcsmark makes an ok check for this. and what is the >purpose for having a short and long test? Just to check the system speed at a short and long time period. With Hiarcs I would only use the long test. Remember, I'm a Vitamin expert, not a >computer whiz. > >So the formula in System Configuration is wrong? Hmmm? Maybe that's why >ChessBase doesn't answer my question about that; however, Gambit-Soft support >said it was correct! Anyway, how could Hiarcs only need such a small amount of >megs even though it's different than Fritz? Are you saying that with more megs >for HT it will perform worse??? Don't worry about hash size with Hiarcs 7. You gain nothing by using more then 64mb, but it does not hurt you either. I see nothing that shows using 64mb hurts you at fast time controls. I would just pick a setting you like in your own mind and keep it there. If you want to get a clearer understanding how hash effects hiarcs 7.32 speed, just runs set of problems with hiarcs 7.32 and see how it performs with different hash sizes. > >I think all the CM6000K guys must be having a good laugh about all this - maybe >I should get CM6000K. This whole situation with Hiarcs is in my opinion - >ABSURD. The wrong manual, wrong hash table info, no explanation about >HiarcsMark, tablebase confusion - I consider it fortunate we were able to run >the program at all. ChessBase deserves a lot of credit for being unresponsive >and totally without regard for the consumer. Either they don't answer, or they >can't answer. Even Mark Uniacke never responded to my query about hash tables. >Well, at this point, I don't know if what you say above about "your" formula for >HT is true. I would like to hear from Mark Uniacke here and get the truth. Also, >I am still interested in what the reason is for the short and long tests? And >how many tests are we supposed to run? Furthermore, is it fact that a higher >HiarcsMark with a lower kN/S is better than a lower HiarcsMark with a higher >kN/S? > >For your information: I have an AMD K6 400MHz processor with 192 MB of RAM and >10.0 GB on the hard drive. > >Regards, >Mel> >>Best Regards, >>Terry
This page took 0.01 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.