Slow Rybka.

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderator: Ras

User avatar
Eelco de Groot
Posts: 4678
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 2:40 am
Full name:   Eelco de Groot

Re: Slow Rybka.

Post by Eelco de Groot »

Terry McCracken wrote:
M ANSARI wrote:If you want to improve your Knps to around 500 Knps on Rybka ... you can do it for around $500 if you already have a running system. Win XP64bit is the OS of choice for Rybka MP.

http://64.68.157.89/forum/viewtopic.php?t=15997
How much for a whole new system? Without making serious compromises but getting the best bang for your buck?

I'm afraid I'm a bit behind the times :oops:

Terry


I don't know yet if I'm going to buy a new system just to be able to run SMP chessprograms. My AMD Athlon computer is from 2004 so I'd rather wait a little with upgrading. I could have put in a new processor already and made it into a dual AMD system but I'm not so eager to follow all the latest technology. But if I had to buy a new system I would probably want a Quad 6600 Intel like M Ansari describes he build for his brother, even if you don't build your own and don't overclock anything you can still have a very fast system. Here in Holland I usually buy from Paradigit and they have a complete Q6600 system, but without monitor, now for € 999,-

My dream system:
http://www.paradigit.nl/configurator.php?system=2054

Intel® Core™ 2 Quad Q6600
Windows Vista® Home Premium
2 GB memory
500 GB harddisk
GeForce 8500GT 256 MB

That is not really very cheap I know, but Paradigit have good service conditions, their systems are usually fast, have quality components and you can add optional hardware if you so wish. This system is running at 2.4 GHz, I wish I knew whether it has the special G0 stepping 'SLACR' variety of the Q6600 , probably it does not. But I don't think I would soon want to overclock the system anyway, even if it is supposed to be easy to do with the G0 6600. But thanks M Ansari for the very interesting article!

My monitor is a CRT, so it's rather bulky and consuming a lot of electricity, but otherwise still a good Philips monitor so I would not yet buy a new flat TFT monitor I think, although for energy and space considerations it would certainly be a lot better!

Windows XP 64 bit was never officially introduced here at least not in a Dutch version, as far as I know. I don't know if Paradigit would supply the system with Windows XP 64 bit instead of Vista.

Amazingly the QX 6700 from Intel would be another € 760,- extra to spend on this system, I could at first not believe this was not a typo, this chip runs at 2.67 GHz so that is not really a lot faster than the Q6600!

Eelco
User avatar
Mike S.
Posts: 1480
Joined: Thu Mar 09, 2006 5:33 am

Re: new comp (was: Slow Rybka.)

Post by Mike S. »

Eelco de Groot wrote: GeForce 8500GT 256 MB
When I bought a new computer recently, I was very saving (economical), with one exception: The graphic RAM. I have a 7600 GS only, but with 512 MB. I can recommend that, if you like to run games with the typical realtime 3D graphics. I didn't make methodical tests to compare with 256 MB or less, but I have made good experiences with it from running some "big" games (although I have an Intel D945 cpu only).

I also have 2 GB and Vista (Home Basic), which runs fine basically, but you have to expect that some older software may not run with it. I could not install CB 7.0 because it couldn't read the CD (I am not sure if it's a Vista incompatibility or a drive problem though, in that case).

It's somewhat risky to buy old games which are cheap now... it will be better to search the Internet for Vista problems with such a game, before buying it. I think such problems are rare though, but some progs are incompatible or would require a patch which may not be produced anymore, for an old program.
Regards, Mike
User avatar
Eelco de Groot
Posts: 4678
Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 2:40 am
Full name:   Eelco de Groot

Re: new comp (was: Slow Rybka.)

Post by Eelco de Groot »

Mike S. wrote:
Eelco de Groot wrote: GeForce 8500GT 256 MB
When I bought a new computer recently, I was very saving (economical), with one exception: The graphic RAM. I have a 7600 GS only, but with 512 MB. I can recommend that, if you like to run games with the typical realtime 3D graphics. I didn't make methodical tests to compare with 256 MB or less, but I have made good experiences with it from running some "big" games (although I have an Intel D945 cpu only).

I also have 2 GB and Vista (Home Basic), which runs fine basically, but you have to expect that some older software may not run with it. I could not install CB 7.0 because it couldn't read the CD (I am not sure if it's a Vista incompatibility or a drive problem though, in that case).

It's somewhat risky to buy old games which are cheap now... it will be better to search the Internet for Vista problems with such a game, before buying it. I think such problems are rare though, but some progs are incompatible or would require a patch which may not be produced anymore, for an old program.
Hi Mike,

I'm not such a heavy gamer, although I do like to play some of the golden oldies like Space Invaders and Asteroids occasionally. I know these are very old... I got the game IL-2 Sturmovik Forgotten Battles with this computer, and Prince of Persia The Sands of Time and Hostile Waters. I like the flight simulator best and I am very good at taking off and then crashing my Russian planes into the local church, but I never managed to get the darned things landed in one piece. But it is a good game with lots of choices of planes and missions to fly.

My current card is a NVIDIA GeForce FX 5200 and it is not really state of the art anymore, I believe it has 128 Mb video RAM but I would have to look up the specs in the documentation somewhere, there are also FX 5200 256 Mb models. The card is most heavily taxed by running Celestia on it, it can still do the most recent versions of the code I believe at a good framerate but the guys at the forum are now experimenting with new planet atmosphere models, and very detailed surface textures for Earth and Mars, at one point I suppose my FX 5200 will not be able to handle that anymore. Some people take their Celestia experience very seriously and using not just their computer screens but also a HDTV to get a Star Trek Ententerprise command-bridge like view;

Image
A picture from an enthusiast's desktop on the Celestia forum http://www.shatters.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=11416

Regards, Eelco

P.S I hope that by November the first servicepack for Vista will be out, because the software is officially one year on the market by then and Microsoft in their courtcase versus Google already stated that by then at least a beta for the first service pack will have come out. Some people still report a lot of problems but there are gradually coming more compatible drivers available I believe. The situation with 32 bit and 64 bit versions of the Vista software OEM versions being sold, as I read somewhere I find that a bit mystifying, can't the 64 bit versions handle also all the 32 bit software in their 32 bit mode? I have not really investigated all that yet, hoping the Vista situation will improve a bit with time!
User avatar
Kirill Kryukov
Posts: 518
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2006 4:12 am
Full name: Kirill Kryukov

Re: Slow Rybka.

Post by Kirill Kryukov »

Rubinus wrote:Depth, not nodes is feature. Not slowly than most opponents.
Depth+1 - Rybka is fastest. But somewhere will not change halfvariant.
No, depth is as useless a measure for comparing different engines as KN/s. I say, let them play 1000 games, then you'll know.. :-) Only the moves count, all other engine output is not useful for comparison.
User avatar
M ANSARI
Posts: 3733
Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 7:10 pm

Re: Slow Rybka.

Post by M ANSARI »

Wow !!! nice monitor ... I want !!!