What is the best known speed of move generation?

[kcc]

Dear computer chess experts,

I am wondering, what is the best known speed of move generation (one thread, no transposition table, etc)?
E.g. simply measured by perft().

On my c2d@2.4GHz, crafty (I've downloaded the most recent 64-bit binary for linux) gives ~19M nodes per second.

Code: Select all

White(1): perft 6
total moves=119060324  time= 6.29
White(1): perft 7
total moves=3195901860  time=167.37

(can't measure for 8 plies, there seem to be an overflow)

With my own engine I get 24M nps on the same machine (the algorithm is similar to the http://www.cis.uab.edu/hyatt/bitmaps.html, section 2)

Code: Select all

d=1     n=20    t=0     ratio=inf
d=2     n=400   t=0     ratio=inf
d=3     n=8902  t=0     ratio=inf
d=4     n=197281        t=0     ratio=inf
d=5     n=4865609       t=0.2   ratio=2.4328e+07
d=6     n=119060324     t=4.92  ratio=2.41993e+07
d=7     n=3195901860    t=131   ratio= 2.43962e+07
d=8     n=84998978956   t=3501.88       ratio=2.42724e+07
d=9     n=2439530234167 t=100312        ratio=2.43193e+07

But I am very curious if any engine is able to generate moves *significantly* faster.

Thanks,

--kcc

[Vempele]

Here is some result including statistics and also mating analysis by SMIRF (thus a little bit slow):

Code: Select all

FEN: r3k2r/p6p/8/8/8/8/P6P/R3K2R w - - 0 1

  +-a--b--c--d--e--f--g--h-+ MS Vis.Studio C++ 32-Bit-Vers. 13.10
8 |[r]:::   :::[k]:::   [r]| (Compilation: May 19 2007)
7 |[p]   :::   :::   :::[p]|
6 |   :::   :::   :::   :::| Perft Testseries
5 |:::   :::   :::   :::   |
4 |   :::   :::   :::   :::| (without caching)
3 |:::   :::   :::   :::   |
2 |<P>:::   :::   :::   <P>| Smirf Test No.:  0
1 |<R>   :::   <K>   :::<R>|
=>+-a--b--c--d--e--f--g--h-+ Break Time: +20.00 Sec.

Ply       Nodes    all (x)   (ep)     all (+)     (#)   Prom.   Cstl.      Sec.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1            14          0      0           0       0       0       0         0
2           192          0      0           4       0       0       0         0
3          3466          5      0         168       0       0       0         0
4         60120        311      0        3108       0       0       0         0
5       1223784       9773      0       82992       4       0       0     0.062
6      24161970     281348      2     1651267      97       0       0     1.484
7     528388659    7551900     54    40457103    9714       0       0     29.08
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


FEN: r3k2r/p6p/8/8/8/8/P6P/R3K2R w - - 0 1

  +-a--b--c--d--e--f--g--h-+ MS Vis.Studio C++ 32-Bit-Vers. 13.10
8 |[r]:::   :::[k]:::   [r]| (Compilation: May 19 2007)
7 |[p]   :::   :::   :::[p]|
6 |   :::   :::   :::   :::| Perft Testseries
5 |:::   :::   :::   :::   | (with TT caching +256.0 MB / 4-fold)
4 |   :::   :::   :::   :::| TT Access Success +71.0%
3 |:::   :::   :::   :::   |
2 |<P>:::   :::   :::   <P>| Smirf Test No.:  0
1 |<R>   :::   <K>   :::<R>|
=>+-a--b--c--d--e--f--g--h-+ Break Time: +10.00 Sec.

Ply        Nodes     all (x)   (ep)     all (+)      (#)  Prom.  Cstl.     Sec.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1             14           0      0           0        0      0      0        0
2            192           0      0           4        0      0      0        0
3           3466           5      0         168        0      0      0        0
4          60120         311      0        3108        0      0      0        0
5        1223784        9773      0       82992        4      0      0    0.032
6       24161970      281348      2     1651267       97      0      0    0.313
7      528388659     7551900     54    40457103     9714      0      0    2.594
8    11297385161   198312821   2463   864164302   196741      0      0    18.33
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+ in single threaded 32 Bit mode)

Reinhard.

That'd be a little over 600 Mnps for perft 8. See this topic.

[Jacob]

Smirf's results are without a make/undo in the leaf nodes, right?

[Alex Brunetti]

[quote="kcc"]

Code: Select all

[code]d=1     n=20    t=0     ratio=inf
d=2     n=400   t=0     ratio=inf
d=3     n=8902  t=0     ratio=inf
d=4     n=197281        t=0     ratio=inf
d=5     n=4865609       t=0.2   ratio=2.4328e+07
d=6     n=119060324     t=4.92  ratio=2.41993e+07
d=7     n=3195901860    t=131   ratio= 2.43962e+07
d=8     n=84998978956   t=3501.88       ratio=2.42724e+07
d=9     n=2439530234167 t=100312        ratio=2.43193e+07

[/quote]
I wonder how fast is mine on your CPU. Perft 6 is completed in 8.5 secs on my very slow PC, but Crafty's (20.14) in 36 seconds. May you test it? You can download 0.5.4a form my site.

[quote]

But I am very curious if any engine is able to generate moves *significantly* faster.
[/quote]

Delfi is faster than mine, but 5.2 seems to have not the perft command anymore. You should test 5.1 or even 5.0.


Alex

[kcc]

That'd be a little over 600 Mnps for perft 8. See this topic.

Emm, that does not count, as the caching was enabled.
For this position I have 20M nps:

Code: Select all

d: 1    n: 14   t: 0    nps: inf
d: 2    n: 192  t: 0    nps: inf
d: 3    n: 3466 t: 0    nps: inf
d: 4    n: 60120        t: 0    nps: inf
d: 5    n: 1223784      t: 0.06 nps: 2.03964e+07
d: 6    n: 24161970     t: 1.19 nps: 2.03042e+07
d: 7    n: 528388659    t: 25.65        nps: 2.05999e+07

SMIRF w/o caching has 18M nps (but the machine is different)

Code: Select all

7     528388659    7551900     54    40457103    9714       0       0     29.08 

[kcc]

I wonder how fast is mine on your CPU. Perft 6 is completed in 8.5 secs on my very slow PC, but Crafty's (20.14) in 36 seconds. May you test it? You can download 0.5.4a form my site.

That may not be apples-to-apples comparison.
Are you running crafty as 64-bit?
Do you have linux version of your engine?

[hgm]

On my c2d@2.4GHz, crafty (I've downloaded the most recent 64-bit binary for linux) gives ~19M nodes per second.

Code: Select all

White(1): perft 6
total moves=119060324  time= 6.29
White(1): perft 7
total moves=3195901860  time=167.37

(can't measure for 8 plies, there seem to be an overflow)

With my own engine I get 24M nps on the same machine

This does not seem very fast for a 2.4GHz C2D. Qperft reaches about that speed on a 1GHz Athlon XP...

Code: Select all

$ perft 6
 - - - - - - - - - - - -
 - - - - - - - - - - - -
 - - r n b q k b n r - -
 - - p p p p p p p p - -
 - - . . . . . . . . - -
 - - . . . . . . . . - -
 - - . . . . . . . . - -
 - - . . . . . . . . - -
 - - P P P P P P P P - -
 - - R N B Q K B N R - -
 - - - - - - - - - - - -
 - - - - - - - - - - - -

Quick Perft by H.G. Muller
Perft mode: No hashing, bulk counting in horizon nodes

perft(1)=20 ( 0.000 sec)

perft(2)=400 ( 0.000 sec)

perft(3)=8902 ( 0.000 sec)

perft(4)=197281 ( 0.010 sec)

perft(5)=4865609 ( 0.210 sec)

perft(6)=119060324 ( 5.498 sec)

[kcc]

perft(6)=119060324 ( 5.498 sec)

Impressive!
On my c2d I get this out of Qperft:

Code: Select all

perft(6)=119060324 ( 1.750 sec)
perft(7)=3195901860 (47.210 sec)

that is about 67M nps... I am stunned.
can someone do better?

[Michael Sherwin]

perft(6)=119060324 ( 5.498 sec)

Impressive!
On my c2d I get this out of Qperft:

Code: Select all

perft(6)=119060324 ( 1.750 sec)
perft(7)=3195901860 (47.210 sec)

that is about 67M nps... I am stunned.
can someone do better?

On an 80486 processor my code runs faster.

Harm's code is hard (next to impossible) to beat on modern processors.

If someone beats it, it would only be by a very small amount.

I may give it a try using my new vector-magnitude code that I have not implemented yet.

[Alex Brunetti]

That may not be apples-to-apples comparison.
Are you running crafty as 64-bit?

No, I just have a 32 bit processor. It may not be apples-to-apples if they run on a 64 bit machine, since my engine is designed for 32 bit

Do you have linux version of your engine?

No, I'm sorry.

Alex