Author: Francesco Di Tolla
Date: 05:29:36 06/28/99
Go up one level in this thread
>I can only offer two data points. In Crafty, _my_ timing allocation code >assumes that there will actually be more time to use than crafty has at the >point it has to make the decision. I'm sorry Bob, but I don't agree here. I think that if your program does this it is a "problem" of your program. Any program that supports a "ponder off" mode should also be able to play at maximum efficency within the time given. Of course if you have more time (while waiting for opponents move) you can play better, but in my personal opinion, if you assume that time is always there and speculate on this it is your fault. (This has nothing to do with trusting eng-eng matches, but is a general consideration). [...] >The other data point was an old Rebel. Ed did all of his time setting while >"permanent brain" was being used. When he turned it off in the NPS match he >saw bad time allocation too. again, something I would call "a bug" not a feature, or do newer version behave the same? [...] >Another point is that some programs (again, mine is an example) depends on >fairly fast hardware, because of some of the search decisions I have made in >the design process. [...] This is reasonable: tweaking a program for the hardware you run on is correct... >Your "ponder=off" type matches effectively cut the processor speed by 1/2, >when you think about it. And the results can definitely be affected.. ... but this is not true, because you're looking at a different position, and even if you make assumptions on next move, you'll have a percentage of correctly guessed moves which is less than 100%, so the speed difference is less then one half. Moreover, is it better to compare two engines on two PC's with a P200 MMX (like SSDF fellows do) or let them coexist on a PII 400? Assuming this two cpu have a factor 2 of difference, would it be better to spend 3 minutes on a move and 3 on the move of your opponent, or six on yours and none on the other? Finally, do the SSDF guys compare properly progrmas making them play on Intel's Pentiums when some engines (like Rebel) prefer other (AMD...). I have no real answer, so I think the important thing is not to take this comparisons to seriously, especially to don't buy after the positioning in the SSDF list! (Personally I choose the engine/program which gives me most fun when I play with it.) regards Franz
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.