TalkChess.com

ah ok, 64 cores, that's excellent.

With Komodo CCT, is the elo gain mainly from evaluation improvements or search improvements or an equal mix of both?

Jesse Gersenson wrote:

Werewolf wrote:Can I ask: how many cores does Komodo 5.1 MP support, and how many do you aim to support in Nov?

Currently supports 64 cores.

http://komodochess.com/store/pages.php?cmsid=9

Then I suppose it's not using any "Lazy MP" approach as hinted at here?

Is the evaluation much different? Just wondering if the money is going to be well spent. Love Komodo. (actually kind of partial to Komodo 4!)

But only want to purchase if I think it gives a good alternative analysis.

As far I know, Komodo 5 r1 from 2012 can be used for Windows and Linux.
I think Komodo CCT is the successor of the r1 edition, isn´t it?
But what about the Mac OS X and Android version, Don?

Best wishes,
Norbert

The 64 bit version is almost ten times smaller then the 32 bit. Why is it so?

regards

Norbert Raimund Leisner wrote:As far I know, Komodo 5 r1 from 2012 can be used for Windows and Linux.
I think Komodo CCT is the successor of the r1 edition, isn´t it?
But what about the Mac OS X and Android version, Don?

Best wishes,
Norbert

Yes, this is a continuation of that program but we have made substantial changes to it. And to answer another question the evaluation has been improved too but I would say the search has changed more than the evaluation.

Komodo 5.1 MP is a rewrite and will be our first program using this new code base.

tomgdrums wrote:Is the evaluation much different? Just wondering if the money is going to be well spent. Love Komodo. (actually kind of partial to Komodo 4!)

But only want to purchase if I think it gives a good alternative analysis.

In general our advice is that if you normally use your engines in MP mode, wait for Komodo MP, but if you normally use them in SP mode, get Komodo CCT. Even if the evaluation is not "much" different from Komodo 5, the overall strength increaase (apparently about 30 elo, as we estimated) is pretty substantial. You can think of it as the rough equivalent of running Komodo 5 on 1.5 cores, if such a thing were possible.

starmaerker wrote:The 64 bit version is almost ten times smaller then the 32 bit. Why is it so?

regards

The 64 bit compile is a Jim Ablett compile - and I forgot to give him credit for that but it is much appreciated. He squeezed slightly more performance out of it than I could.

The size of the executable is not that relevant though, it is working great so far.

Don,

I'm also curious, neglecting the new built-in multiprocessor support, are you using C++11 as a "better C" or are you going the whole nine yards and using all the dark corners of the language? I (long ago) moved from C to C++ because I wanted stronger type checking, a real string class, inline functions etc. There were other advantages too, but I definitely use it as a better C, (although I do use its data abstraction features much more now then when I originally made the switch).

regards,
--tom

Tom Likens wrote:Don,

I'm also curious, neglecting the new built-in multiprocessor support, are you using C++11 as a "better C" or are you going the whole nine yards and using all the dark corners of the language? I (long ago) moved from C to C++ because I wanted stronger type checking, a real string class, inline functions etc. There were other advantages too, but I definitely use it as a better C, (although I do use its data abstraction features much more now then when I originally made the switch).

regards,
--tom

I'm not using every dark corner of the language, I just wanted to learn C++ and was planning a major code cleanup anyway. In particular this is more like a C++ program than C++11 and the position state is now a class, I like the new for loops which is c++11 specific and templates are nice. Probably more than anything I wanted to use the c++ standardized threading model and the "chrono" stuff for consistent time handling which is quite awesome. There is not that much difference in windows threads and pthreads but it's great having completely portable source code.