Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 15:20:18 01/08/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 08, 2000 at 13:20:12, Chessfun wrote:
>On January 08, 2000 at 12:17:51, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
><snipped>
>
>>I see that this position raises very little interest, or maybe top programs are
>>not able to solve it? Actually I know that Genius5 solves it pretty fast (maybe
>>faster than Tiger, I'm not sure).
>>
>>
>> Christophe
>
>To answer the first post. I don't have a favorite program you won't
>send it to me !!.
>
>Genius 5. Takes 3 mins 25 secs on Cel 433 to post a + score for 1. f6.
>
>Genius 6. Takes 4 mins 12 secs to post a + score for 1. f6.
>It looks at 1. f6. for first 44 secs showing - then switches to Kxg2
>before going back to 1. f6.
>
>CM6K default no solve after 12 min 19 secs 42,000,000 nodes.
>
>Hiarcs 7.32 Looks at 1. f6. for first up to first 2 mins showing -
>then switches to Kxg2 before I gave up at depth 15/30 approx 7 mins
>still showing Kxg2.
>
>Fritz 6 No luck after 5 mins 1. Kxg2.
>
>I had tried this on other softwares, Tiger is the fastest I have heard.
>
>
>Thanks.
I did not expect Tiger to be the fastest.
How much hash tables have you used? This position is rather sensitive to the
amount of hash table (it's natural as it is an endgame with reduced material).
Actually I have just realized that Tiger solves it faster with 8Mb hash: 39
seconds with 8Mb, 1m12s with 16Mb, and 28s with 32Mb hash tables (new record?).
The 16Mb result is an accident, it happens from time to time. Results on a K6-2
450MHz.
Genius5 DOS is handicapped as the version I have, which was provided together
with G5 Windows, cannot use more 384Kb.
I suppose you have tried Genius5 Windows with a decent amount of hash tables?
Christophe
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.