Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:26:59 07/30/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 30, 2001 at 10:44:22, Frank Quisinsky wrote: >On July 30, 2001 at 09:31:28, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On July 29, 2001 at 10:50:47, Frank Quisinsky wrote: >> >>> >>>Hi Bob, >>> >>>the same discuss then for 2 years here :-) >>> >>>I, the ex non ponderer, will say the following: >>> >>>01. >>>You have right if you say that with ponder = off engines have time manangment >>>problems, not all and not in all games but it's an important point. I know that >>>this is for statistics not sooo important (ELO statistic). >>> >>>02. >>>Match without ponder on single system with Athlon 1Ghz: >>>Engine A = 1Ghz >>>Engine B = 1Ghz >>> >>>Match with ponder on a single system with Athlon 1Ghz: >>>Engine A = ~ 497-500Mhz >>>Engine B = ~ 497-500Mhz >>> >>>Now we have 25-40% ponder hits if the engines play on the same level (after my >>>experiments). >>> >>>Result: >>>500Mhz + 25-40% ponder hits = ~700MHz. >>> >>>With ponder = on, the matches are running with 700Mhz on 1Ghz Athlon! >>>With ponder = off, the matches are running with 1Ghz on 1Ghz Athlon! >>> >>>I believe better is to play with ponder = off on single system. OK, the time >>>managment is a good point so say please with ponder but 300 MHz is a better >>>point to say please without ponder. >>> >>>03. >>>4-piece and 5-piece tablebases and engine-engine matches on a Dual system ... >>> >>>This is not very clear. >>>We have engines witch used tablebases very aggressive or not very aggressive. >>> >>>Example: >>>Gromit - Patzer with 5-pieces ... >>> >>>Gromit played move 50 in 2:45 with ponder = on and 5-pieces. >>>Only 20-30% processor time in this game if Gromit used 5-pieces. >>>Patzer played move 50 in 1.25 with ponder = on and 5-pieces. >>> >>>Now the same positions with 4-pieces ... >>> >>>Gromit play move 50 in 1.58! with ponder = on and *4-pieces*. >>>Patzer played move 50 in 1.13 with ponder = on and *4-pieces*. >>> >>>Without 4-piece tablesbases are the differents not very important. >>> >>>In my opinion it is better to play eng-eng matches with ponder on a dual system >>>with 4-piece tablebases. >>> >>>Best >>>Frank >> >> >>Your math is fine. > >Hi Bob, > >good, for two years you say my math is bad, but in this case you have right (I >mean for two years) :-)) > >But your reasoning is wrong. Which would you rather do: > >>(1) play a match between two programs, using their strongest settings, and using >>two 700mhz processors; > >>(2) play a match between two programs, using weaker settings on at least one, if >>not both, using two 1ghz processors? >> >> >>I vote for (1) because of using the strongest settings. You are voting for (2) >>to avoid wasting compute cycles. I think (1) is more important... > >Yes, this is a good idea and a nice experiment. >I have an Dual Pentium III 733 MHz and an Dual Pentium III 1GHz. > >But it is not 100%ig clear which test exactly! > >What do you think about the following match idea: >Only with one CPUs to point 1-4. > >01. >Crafty 18.10 on Dual Pentium III 733Mhz with ponder against Yace 0.99.50 on Dual >Pentium III 1.05GHz (the machine is running with FSB = 140) without ponder, 40 >moves in 40 minutes, 50 games. > >02. >Yace 0.99.50 on Dual Pentium III 733Mhz with ponder against Crafty 18.10 on Dual >Pentium III 1.05Ghz without ponder, 40 moves in 40 minutes, 50 games. > >03. >The same match but Crafty 18.10 without ponder (1.05Ghz) and Yace 0.99.50 >(1.05Ghz) without ponder, 50 games. > >04. >After this matches, a new match Crafty 18.10 (1.05Ghz) with ponder - Yace >0.99.50 (1.05 Ghz) with ponder, 50 games. > >In 2-3 months, after my CCE tourney I can make a test. >If you have a better idea please write. > >I think 128 MB for hashtables, and 4pieces tablebases is good enough for the >experiment. Tablebases with 4Mb cache. No lean options in configuration files. > >Best >Frank I don't think the experiment is valid... Because you don't know how much crafty and yace are affected by ponder=off. It is possible that both do a bit worse on time management. So that the matches match pretty well in score. But does that mean ponder=off is then ok? Only for those two programs. You have to repeat this for _every_ pair of engines you want to test like that...
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.