Author: Peter McKenzie
Date: 01:04:41 10/31/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 31, 1999 at 02:28:52, Christophe Theron wrote: >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? I was assuming (possibly incorrectly) that Enrique meant it was crafty under Fritz using the Fritz winboard adaptor. The Fritz implementation of the winboard protocol is somewhat unusual. I believe the effect of it is to clear the hash tables before each move. Who knows what other weird side effects there are: my engine which works fine under winboard doesn't even work under Fritz. I doubt that Bob has even once tested crafty under Fritz. Is there a 'native Fritz' crafty engine? If so, I guess it would be more reliable but it was probably converted to a Fritz engine by the chessbase people so who knows whether they got it 100% right. > > > >>>>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? To be honest I find the tone of your post somewhat distasteful. > >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 0.01 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.