Author: Steve Lopez
Date: 07:00:36 01/18/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 17, 2000 at 11:31:21, Joe T. Pangilinan wrote: > One question though, in one of your articles, you suggested a search depth >setting of 11 ply for Analyis of "most positions", and 9 ply for positions that >are " not too tough". Now, in previous Computer Chess reports Articles, they ran >tests of Dedicated Chess Computers, and found that most of them can find >solutions to Problem Test positions within 6 - 7 plies depth. > Would you agree then, that a 7 ply depth search would be good enough setting >in analyzing Non-Master Games, and 11 ply depth for GM Games? When I run analysis of my own games (or anyone else's), I prefer a 9-11 ply depth. This has nothing to do with the strengths of the players, it's just a question of processor speed/RAM and how long it will tie up the computer to run a deeper analysis. Whenever I suggest a 13-ply depth, I end up getting tons of letters from readers with Pentium 120/32 Mb RAM boxes who complain that it takes 20 hours to analyze a 100-move Alekhine game with lots of play in the middlegame. So I generally suggest shallower depths in my articles these days to take these people into account. However, if you've got the latest AMD RocketBoy5000/566 Mhz Killer Cobra dual processors and 512 Mb RAM, crank the search depth on up. It's really more a question of hardware than one of who played the game. I just try to keep things as simple as possible in my articles for those readers who respond to the question "How much RAM do you have?" with "Huh?" -- Steve Lopez The Chess Kamikaze Home Page: http://www.geocities.com/ludekdudek/ The Chess Kamikaze Club: http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/chesskamikazes
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.