Discussion of computer chess matches and engine tournaments.
Moderators: hgm , Rebel , chrisw
fastgm
Posts: 818 Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 6:57 pm
Post
by fastgm » Sun Jan 07, 2018 1:19 pm
Conditions:
Dual AMD Opteron 6376, Cutechess-Cli, 100 games, fixed 60 seconds per move, opening book: Noomen_2-move_Testsuite.pgn, no adjudication rules, no tablebases
Stockfish 8, 31 threads, 16384 MB Hash
vs
Stockfish 8, 31 threads, 512 MB Hash
Code: Select all
1 Stockfish 8 T31 16384 +7 +3/=96/-1 51.00% 51.0/100
2 Stockfish 8 T31 512 -7 +1/=96/-3 49.00% 49.0/100
Engine Depth Time Games Moves Average
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Stockfish 8 T31 16384 42.11 114:02:17 100 7078 58.00
Stockfish 8 T31 512 42.54 113:58:48 100 7076 57.99
Program Elo + - Games Score Av.Op. Draws
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 Stockfish 8 T31 16384 : 3003 16 12 100 51.0 % 2997 96.0 %
2 Stockfish 8 T31 512 : 2997 12 16 100 49.0 % 3003 96.0 %
Wins = 3
Draws = 96
Losses = 1
Av.Op. Elo = 3000
Result : 51.0/100 (+3,=96,-1)
Perf. : 51.0 %
Margins :
68 % : (+ 1.1,- 0.9 %) -> [ 50.1, 52.1 %]
95 % : (+ 2.3,- 1.7 %) -> [ 49.3, 53.3 %]
99.7 % : (+ 3.8,- 2.4 %) -> [ 48.6, 54.8 %]
Elo : 3007
Margins :
68 % : (+ 8,- 6) -> [3001,3015]
95 % : (+ 16,- 12) -> [2995,3023]
99.7 % : (+ 26,- 16) -> [2990,3033]
Games : 100 (finished)
White Wins : 4 ( 4.0 %)
Black Wins : 0 ( 0.0 %)
Draws : 96 (96.0 %)
White Perf. : 52.0 %
Black Perf. : 48.0 %
Individual statistics:
1 Stockfish 8 T31 16384 : 3003 100 (+ 3,= 96,- 1), 51.0 %
2 Stockfish 8 T31 512 : 2997 100 (+ 1,= 96,- 3), 49.0 %
All games:
http://www.fastgm.de/schach/SF8-T31-163 ... ec-100.pgn
.
Modern Times
Posts: 3539 Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 11:02 pm
Post
by Modern Times » Sun Jan 07, 2018 2:08 pm
I've never been a fan of these huge hash sizes. Perhaps they make sense for infinite analysis where in conjunction with large pages they give a boost. But I think maybe it also varies depending on CPU, motherboard and RAM architecture as well.
elcabesa
Posts: 855 Joined: Sun May 23, 2010 1:32 pm
Post
by elcabesa » Sun Jan 07, 2018 2:29 pm
Can you try to see what happens with 21 core vs 16 core?
syzygy
Posts: 5555 Joined: Tue Feb 28, 2012 11:56 pm
Post
by syzygy » Sun Jan 07, 2018 2:51 pm
So in a 100-game match played at 1 minute/move and with many cores, handicapping SF8 by giving it a small hash table does not "cripple" it.
Ozymandias
Posts: 1532 Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 2:30 am
Post
by Ozymandias » Mon Jan 08, 2018 7:55 am
The only one single condition that "crippled" it, was the absence of a book.
Jouni
Posts: 3271 Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:15 pm
Post
by Jouni » Mon Jan 08, 2018 2:13 pm
Really surprising! 128 GB SF limit is definitely no problem. TCEC should go to 1 GB for optimal play?
Jouni
CMCanavessi
Posts: 1142 Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2017 4:06 pm
Location: Argentina
Post
by CMCanavessi » Mon Jan 08, 2018 4:18 pm
Ozymandias wrote: The only one single condition that "crippled" it, was the absence of a book.
And TBs.
Ozymandias
Posts: 1532 Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 2:30 am
Post
by Ozymandias » Mon Jan 08, 2018 4:44 pm
CMCanavessi wrote: Ozymandias wrote: The only one single condition that "crippled" it, was the absence of a book.
And TBs.
TBs have a bigger impact at ultra fast TCs. IIRC, this was 1min/move on good HW, so not exactly crippling.
CMCanavessi
Posts: 1142 Joined: Thu Dec 28, 2017 4:06 pm
Location: Argentina
Post
by CMCanavessi » Mon Jan 08, 2018 5:48 pm
Ozymandias wrote: CMCanavessi wrote: Ozymandias wrote: The only one single condition that "crippled" it, was the absence of a book.
And TBs.
TBs have a bigger impact at ultra fast TCs. IIRC, this was 1min/move on good HW, so not exactly crippling.
No, it's not crippling but you don't just have 1 cause, you have to add them all up.
1GB hash + no TBs + no book + 1 year old version + weird time control = cripple.
If you separate them, the effect is not that noticeable.
Ozymandias
Posts: 1532 Joined: Sun Oct 25, 2009 2:30 am
Post
by Ozymandias » Mon Jan 08, 2018 7:49 pm
CMCanavessi wrote: Ozymandias wrote: CMCanavessi wrote: Ozymandias wrote: The only one single condition that "crippled" it, was the absence of a book.
And TBs.
TBs have a bigger impact at ultra fast TCs. IIRC, this was 1min/move on good HW, so not exactly crippling.
No, it's not crippling but you don't just have 1 cause, you have to add them all up.
1GB hash + no TBs + no book + 1 year old version + weird time control = cripple.
If you separate them, the effect is not that noticeable.
The book alone is noticeable.