Author: Andrew Williams
Date: 10:18:42 07/18/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 18, 1999 at 13:01:40, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On July 18, 1999 at 11:06:34, Andrew Williams wrote: > >>On July 18, 1999 at 10:00:42, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On July 18, 1999 at 03:17:02, Scott Gasch wrote: >>> >>>>What are the typical ways people use to improve the speed of the searching >>>>algorithm? Here's what I have done: move ordering / history, memory pool for >>>>moves so I am not calling malloc/free, optimized my C as much as I can, save a >>>>pointer to the kings on a board representation so I do not have to search for >>>>them when looking for checks. >>>> >>>>And still the program is sluggish; it gets a little over 20,000 nodes/sec on my >>>>AMD K6-3 400. For comparison I clocked TSCP on the same machine and it is >>>>getting about 15,000 nodes/sec. >>>> >>>>How can I speed this up more? What is a good speed on this kind of hardware? >>>> >>>>Thanks, >>>>Scott >>> >>> >>>First thing to check is your compile options. 15K is _very_ slow. It should >>>be 10x that for TSCP... >> >> >>Do you mean "2x that for TSCP"? I just tried mine and got approx 30Knps - this >>is on a K6-2 300. (The position I tried was after 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 Nf6) >> >>Andrew > > >No... something is wrong. Crafty, on a P5/133, hits around 30K nodes per >second. You are on a machine 3x faster at least, maybe 3.5x. It sounds like >the optimizer isn't enabled... Unless there's something odd about my copy of TSCP, I think it's just that TSCP is miles slower than crafty. On my K6-2 300, crafty delivers 106K nps on the "bench" command (this is v15.4), which is about in line with what you're quoting for the 133 machine. regards Andrew
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.