Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 00:28:52 10/31/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 31, 1999 at 00:02:37, Peter McKenzie wrote:
>On October 30, 1999 at 17:52:02, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On October 30, 1999 at 08:22:00, Enrique Irazoqui wrote:
>>
>>>I have played 2 matches at game/5 between Tiger 12.0 and Crafty 16.18 as an
>>>engine for Fritz.
>
>You played crafty under Fritz? Not a great start for a 'scientific'
> experiment.
What's the problem?
>>>Crafty played on a PIII-500, 64MB hashtables, the Nalimov tablebases that come
>>>with Fritz and the General book of Fritz 5 built after games of 2500+ players.
>>>
>>>Tiger 12.0 played on a PII-300, 32MB hashtables and the small book of Tiger 11.7
>>>with only 35000 positions.
>>
>>Oops... Not exactly.
>>
>>This book indeed comes from the first versions of Tiger 11.x but it contains
>>only 7682 moves.
>>
>>This is 35 times smaller than the current book provided with Tiger 12.0.
>>
>>
>>
>>> I used this book to compensate for Crafty not using
>>>its own. It was not uncommon to see Tiger out of book after 2, 3 or 4 moves. I
>>>don't think that the book gave Tiger any kind of advantage.
>>>
>>>In the first match, Tiger won 25-13, +19 -7 =12, scoring 65.7%
>>
>>Wow! What elo rating difference would that mean?
>>
>>
>>
>>>The second match was played under the same conditions, except that Tiger had PB
>>>off. In this second match, Tiger won 23-21, +16 -14 =14, scoring 52.2%.
>>>
>>>Going back to the discussion of a few weeks ago about PB on/off, these 2 matches
>>>seem to indicate that PB off is not more detrimental than what could be expected
>>>by just not using the usual 50% of the opponent's time.
>>>
>>>The delay in transmitting the moves through auto232 is almost 3 seconds/move for
>>>the dos driver and about 2/10 for the windows driver. Considering that the
>>>average in these matches is 79 moves/game, each game lasted 14 minutes instead
>>>of 10. Assuming that both programs guessed 50% of the opponent's moves, Tiger
>>>and Crafty used 9.5 minutes/game (5 + 4.5) each with PB on, while in the second
>>>match Tiger used 5 minutes/game. It is as if Tiger would have played the first
>>>match on a P300 and the second on a P150. All this mess (sorry) makes the
>>>results of both matches quite coherent.
>>>
>>>I tried all this PB on/off thing in a different way. Didzis plays with 2
>>>programs on one machine and PB off. I replayed with 2 machines one of his games
>>>Tiger-CM6K and both programs played the same moves.
>>>
>>>So it seems that for some programs playing with PB off has no other effect than
>>>having less time to compute.
>>
>>
>>Also it seems that a crippled Tiger is still better than a full strength Crafty
>>(PII-300/small book against PIII-500).
>>
>>And it seems that a crippled crippled Tiger is still at least as strong as a
>>full strength Crafty (PII-300/PB off/small book against PIII-500).
>>
>>I find this interesting as some time ago Bob was laughing at me because I'm
>>still using a 386sx20 for some of my tests and algorithmic improvements.
>>
>>I would not be surprised if Chess Tiger 12.0 on PII-300 was able to stand Crafty
>>on a Quad-Xeon. After all that would only be a 4x speed advantage for Crafty. :)
>>
>
>You talk the talk, but can you walk the walk?
>I'll look forward to seeing tiger on ICC.
I'll do when I have some free time.
Is there something in what I say you don't find reasonnable?
Tiger was able to win a blitz match with something close to a 3x speed handicap.
Do you think the Quad-Xeon computes more than 3 times faster than a PII-300?
Don't forget to take into account what you lose of the original speed with a
parallel search.
Christophe
This page took 0.02 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.