44 elo swing depending on hardware!

[M ANSARI]

I think hyperthreading OFF is always best, but the latest OS (Win 7 and Win 8) seem to do a lot better job dealing with hyperthreading than older OS's. In some cases hyperthreading might even help a tiny bit if the OS deals with it properly. But really for chess, it is always simpler to just have HT OFF as that is one less thing to worry about that can hurt performance.

[shrapnel]

I think hyperthreading OFF is always best, but the latest OS (Win 7 and Win 8) seem to do a lot better job dealing with hyperthreading than older OS's. In some cases hyperthreading might even help a tiny bit if the OS deals with it properly. But really for chess, it is always simpler to just have HT OFF as that is one less thing to worry about that can hurt performance.

Exactly ! I'm not too sure that Komodo 6 performs worse with HT Off. In fact, I have a STRONG feeling that it performs MUCH better with HT On !
Larry's initial results were correct , in my opinion, but for some reason he seemed to doubt his own results..... !
Well, not my problem ; I'm getting excellent results with Komodo 6 with HT On in my online games. With HT off, Komodo 6 was mediocre...it really needs very strong HW or HT on, to come into its own...anything that gets the kN/s up works.
This was not necessarily the case with H3, but K6 really benefits with increased kN/s !

[Modern Times]

I think hyperthreading OFF is always best, but the latest OS (Win 7 and Win 8) seem to do a lot better job dealing with hyperthreading than older OS's. In some cases hyperthreading might even help a tiny bit if the OS deals with it properly. But really for chess, it is always simpler to just have HT OFF as that is one less thing to worry about that can hurt performance.

Exactly ! I'm not too sure that Komodo 6 performs worse with HT Off. In fact, I have a STRONG feeling that it performs MUCH better with HT On !
Larry's initial results were correct , in my opinion, but for some reason he seemed to doubt his own results..... !
Well, not my problem ; I'm getting excellent results with Komodo 6 with HT On in my online games. With HT off, Komodo 6 was mediocre...it really needs very strong HW or HT on, to come into its own...anything that gets the kN/s up works.
This was not necessarily the case with H3, but K6 really benefits with increased kN/s !

Totally different scenario I think. Larry was running multiple 1 core matches on the same machine, and using hyperthreading as if they were real cores.

You are no doubt running just one instance of Komodo, using as many threads as you can.

[Modern Times]

Back to the original theory - that different hardware can give different results - Adam quoted an example with Gaviota, where over 26,000 games x 2 on two different Intel machines gave a 10 Elo difference in performance. So it seems that hardware can have an effect. And that is not even AMD vs Intel, it is two Intel boxes of a similar generation (QX6700, E8400 from memory)

That is what was so valuable about IPON in my opinion, all his 6 or 8 machines were identical. In CCRL we just hope that all the different hardware averages itself out.

[ThatsIt]

[...snip...]
Its all about playing a lot, lot, lot of games! and with 5'+3'' most
people dont play lot of games, but only 100 or 150 in the head-to-
head competition. And thats obviously not enough.
[...snip...]
Best - Stefan

Modesty is_not your matter, isn't it ?
My view:
better 50, 100 or 150 games with 5'+3" than thousands of ultra bullet scrap !

[IWB]

My view:
better 50, 100 or 150 games with 5'+3" than thousands of ultra bullet scrap ...!

... with very identical engines!

[Modern Times]

Let's all remain friends here

[ThatsIt]

Let's all remain friends here

Hi Ray !

Most of the time i choose a friend of mine myself.

Best wishes,
G.S.

[kranium]

[...snip...]
Its all about playing a lot, lot, lot of games! and with 5'+3'' most
people dont play lot of games, but only 100 or 150 in the head-to-
head competition. And thats obviously not enough.
[...snip...]
Best - Stefan

Modesty is_not your matter, isn't it ?
My view:
better 50, 100 or 150 games with 5'+3" than thousands of ultra bullet scrap !

the top engine's ratings in Stefan's Lightspeed list match fairly closely with CEGT, and other lists

but Stefan's list has a couple big advantages:

it's unbiased and all-inclusive
and more importantly: he plays enough games to achieve a high level of accuracy
(an error margin of +-5 ELO compared to CEGT 40/20's +-15 ELO or more)

unlike CEGT, he does not play the games on different hardware and simply combine the results
(which may result in big ELO swing, as Larry points out in this topic)

that said, i'm not surprised to see just how popular his site has become...
and it may begin to explain your animosity towards him

[lkaufman]

[...snip...]
Its all about playing a lot, lot, lot of games! and with 5'+3'' most
people dont play lot of games, but only 100 or 150 in the head-to-
head competition. And thats obviously not enough.
[...snip...]
Best - Stefan

Modesty is_not your matter, isn't it ?
My view:
better 50, 100 or 150 games with 5'+3" than thousands of ultra bullet scrap !

the top engine's ratings in Stefan's Lightspeed list match fairly closely with CEGT, and other lists

but Stefan's list has a couple big advantages:

it's unbiased and all-inclusive
and more importantly: he plays enough games to achieve a high level of accuracy
(an error margin of +-5 ELO compared to CEGT 40/20's +-15 ELO or more)

unlike CEGT, he does not play the games on different hardware and simply combine the results
(which may result in big ELO swing, as Larry points out in this topic)

that said, i'm not surprised to see just how popular his site has become...
and it may begin to explain your animosity towards him

Now that I have the hardware, I'm planning to get an answer once and for all to the question of bullet chess (like LS list) correlates well with blitz lists (like IPON and now the 5' + 3" CEGT list). I'm running a gauntlet for the new Komodo (against five top engines) at 2' + 1" (HT off, same book as LS uses, 36 cores running on it so 36 games at once. When I'm done, I'll cut the time in half and repeat, and if time permits I'll do 4' +2". I'll have enough games to be able to say once and for all how valid bullet testing is, if the goal is to predict results at 5' + 3" or so. Although I've often said that I think bullet testing favors Ippo related engines, I'm open-minded; if the results show otherwise I won't hesitate to admit I was wrong. Actually it would be very good news for the computer chess community if I am wrong, because it means that we can get much more reliable sample sizes just by playing faster games.
So far my result (for TCEC stage 3 version) against Houdini 3 is 47.1% out of 1900 games, about 20 elo down. If there really is no difference in relative strength of engines at different levels, I would expect something like 48% at 4'+2" and 46% at 1' + 30". The percentage should asymptotically approach 50% at super long time controls. But I claim that there is some reasonable level where Komodo actually will score over 50% in a long match. Maybe this will shed some light on the question. I may actually just run a fairly slow match on my quad to see if I get a plus score.