Permanent Brain

Moderators: Elijah, Igbo, timetraveller

unofficial
I've been banned!
Points: 6 000,00 
Posts: 99
Joined: 25/10/2021, 16:20
Status: Offline (Active 1 Year, 5 Months, 1 Week, 1 Day, 15 Hours, 1 Minute ago)
Topics: 6
Reputation: 752
1
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 266 times

Re: Permanent Brain

Post by unofficial »

hardware : win7 64 pro sp1, dual e5-2660v3, 2 numa nodes, cluster-on-die off, hyperthreading on, ecc registered ram
gui : cutechess-cli.exe -concurrency 1 -maxmoves 200 -draw movenumber=40 movecount=5 score=10 -tb "C:\Syzygy" -tbpieces 6
engines : Eman 7.80 AVX2, nn-ac07bd334b62.nnue (last green net), tc 1min+1sec, hash 1GB, move overhead 1sec
openings : 20 first legal moves with reversed colors => 40 games

engines.json :

Code: Select all

[
	{
		"command" : "Eman 7.80 64-bit AVX2.exe",
		"name" : "12T Eman ponder on",
		"options" : [
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 24,
				"max" : 100,
				"min" : -100,
				"name" : "Contempt",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 0
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : true,
				"name" : "Dynamic Contempt",
				"type" : "check",
				"value" : true
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 1,
				"max" : 512,
				"min" : 1,
				"name" : "Threads",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 12
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 16,
				"max" : 33554432,
				"min" : 1,
				"name" : "Hash",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 1024
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "Eman.exp",
				"name" : "Experience File",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "work1.exp"
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : false,
				"name" : "Experience Read Only",
				"type" : "check",
				"value" : false
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : false,
				"name" : "Experience Book",
				"type" : "check",
				"value" : false
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 16,
				"max" : 100,
				"min" : 1,
				"name" : "Experience Book Max Moves",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 100
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "eval.nnue",
				"name" : "NNUE Eval File",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "nn-ac07bd334b62.nnue"
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 10,
				"max" : 5000,
				"min" : 0,
				"name" : "Move Overhead (ms)",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 1000
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "Eman.bin",
				"name" : "Book 1 File",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "<empty>"
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "<empty>",
				"name" : "SyzygyPath",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "<empty>"
			}
		],
		"protocol" : "uci",
		"stderrFile" : "",
		"whitepov" : true,
		"ponder" : true,
		"variants" : [
			"standard",
			"fischerandom"
		],
		"workingDirectory" : "E:\\JEUX\\CUTECHESS GUI\\moteurs\\eman"
	},
	{
		"command" : "Eman 7.80 64-bit AVX2.exe",
		"name" : "24T Eman ponder off",
		"options" : [
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 24,
				"max" : 100,
				"min" : -100,
				"name" : "Contempt",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 0
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : true,
				"name" : "Dynamic Contempt",
				"type" : "check",
				"value" : true
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 1,
				"max" : 512,
				"min" : 1,
				"name" : "Threads",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 24
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 16,
				"max" : 33554432,
				"min" : 1,
				"name" : "Hash",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 1024
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "Eman.exp",
				"name" : "Experience File",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "work2.exp"
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : false,
				"name" : "Experience Read Only",
				"type" : "check",
				"value" : false
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : false,
				"name" : "Experience Book",
				"type" : "check",
				"value" : false
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 16,
				"max" : 100,
				"min" : 1,
				"name" : "Experience Book Max Moves",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 100
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "eval.nnue",
				"name" : "NNUE Eval File",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "nn-ac07bd334b62.nnue"
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 10,
				"max" : 5000,
				"min" : 0,
				"name" : "Move Overhead (ms)",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 1000
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "Eman.bin",
				"name" : "Book 1 File",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "<empty>"
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "<empty>",
				"name" : "SyzygyPath",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "<empty>"
			}
		],
		"protocol" : "uci",
		"stderrFile" : "",
		"whitepov" : true,
		"ponder" : false,
		"variants" : [
			"standard",
			"fischerandom"
		],
		"workingDirectory" : "E:\\JEUX\\CUTECHESS GUI\\moteurs\\eman"
	}
]
eman_vs_ponder.cmd :

Code: Select all

@cutechess-cli -engine conf="12T Eman ponder on" -engine conf="24T Eman ponder off" -each tc=60+1 -games 40 -openings file="20_court.pgn" start=1 -pgnout "eman_vs_ponder.pgn" fi -repeat -recover -concurrency 1 -maxmoves 200 -draw movenumber=40 movecount=5 score=10 -tb "C:\Syzygy" -tbpieces 6 -event %computername% -site "dual xeon e5-2660v3" -ratinginterval 10
@pause
Ordo :

Code: Select all

   # PLAYER                 :  RATING  ERROR  POINTS  PLAYED   (%)    W    D    L  D(%)  OppAvg  OppN
   1 24T Eman ponder off    :       9     82    20.5      40  51.3    2   37    1  92.5       0     1
   2 12T Eman ponder on     :       0   ----    19.5      40  48.8    1   37    2  92.5       9     1

White advantage = -26.35 +/- 40.87
Draw rate (equal opponents) = 50.00 % +/- 0.00
pgnStats eman_vs_ponder.pgn :
12T Eman ponder on with 1/40 wins (2,50%, D42/32, 1 620 ms) :

1. g4 @ 100,00%

24T Eman ponder off with 2/40 wins (5,00%, D43/40, 1 784 ms) :

1. f3 @ 50,00%
1. g4 @ 50,00%

Averages :
181 sec/game
109 plies/game
Thanks to 24 threads, "ponder off" saw 1 deeper ply in average and 8 deeper plies in max.

I take the first game as an example to understand what happened between both engines :
Image
In this game :
> thanks to 24 threads, "ponder off" saw 2 deeper plies in average despite a shorter time/move
> +83 seconds of analysis (+80% extra work) were useless for "ponder on"

I looked at the 40 games and "ponder on" almost lost in game #3 and failed to win the game #22.

ENJOY !

edit : https://mega.nz/file/yxRGUZDK#YwvOgHFOQoVEV7SbuU70s4rM1LmBRlpaCXT-TncEFFg
Sedat Canbaz
I've been banned!
Points: 49 635,00 
Forum Contributions
Posts: 1840
Joined: 04/11/2019, 3:02
Status: Offline (Active 7 Months, 3 Weeks, 1 Day, 14 Hours, 33 Minutes ago)
Topics: 17
Reputation: 5880
1
Has thanked: 1742 times
Been thanked: 5098 times

Re: Permanent Brain

Post by Sedat Canbaz »

unofficial wrote: 16/01/2022, 13:32 hardware : win7 64 pro sp1, dual e5-2660v3, 2 numa nodes, cluster-on-die off, hyperthreading on, ecc registered ram
gui : cutechess-cli.exe -concurrency 1 -maxmoves 200 -draw movenumber=40 movecount=5 score=10 -tb "C:\Syzygy" -tbpieces 6
engines : Eman 7.80 AVX2, nn-ac07bd334b62.nnue (last green net), tc 1min+1sec, hash 1GB, move overhead 1sec
openings : 20 first legal moves with reversed colors => 40 games

engines.json :

Code: Select all

[
	{
		"command" : "Eman 7.80 64-bit AVX2.exe",
		"name" : "12T Eman ponder on",
		"options" : [
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 24,
				"max" : 100,
				"min" : -100,
				"name" : "Contempt",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 0
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : true,
				"name" : "Dynamic Contempt",
				"type" : "check",
				"value" : true
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 1,
				"max" : 512,
				"min" : 1,
				"name" : "Threads",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 12
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 16,
				"max" : 33554432,
				"min" : 1,
				"name" : "Hash",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 1024
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "Eman.exp",
				"name" : "Experience File",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "work1.exp"
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : false,
				"name" : "Experience Read Only",
				"type" : "check",
				"value" : false
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : false,
				"name" : "Experience Book",
				"type" : "check",
				"value" : false
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 16,
				"max" : 100,
				"min" : 1,
				"name" : "Experience Book Max Moves",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 100
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "eval.nnue",
				"name" : "NNUE Eval File",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "nn-ac07bd334b62.nnue"
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 10,
				"max" : 5000,
				"min" : 0,
				"name" : "Move Overhead (ms)",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 1000
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "Eman.bin",
				"name" : "Book 1 File",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "<empty>"
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "<empty>",
				"name" : "SyzygyPath",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "<empty>"
			}
		],
		"protocol" : "uci",
		"stderrFile" : "",
		"whitepov" : true,
		"ponder" : true,
		"variants" : [
			"standard",
			"fischerandom"
		],
		"workingDirectory" : "E:\\JEUX\\CUTECHESS GUI\\moteurs\\eman"
	},
	{
		"command" : "Eman 7.80 64-bit AVX2.exe",
		"name" : "24T Eman ponder off",
		"options" : [
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 24,
				"max" : 100,
				"min" : -100,
				"name" : "Contempt",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 0
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : true,
				"name" : "Dynamic Contempt",
				"type" : "check",
				"value" : true
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 1,
				"max" : 512,
				"min" : 1,
				"name" : "Threads",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 24
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 16,
				"max" : 33554432,
				"min" : 1,
				"name" : "Hash",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 1024
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "Eman.exp",
				"name" : "Experience File",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "work2.exp"
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : false,
				"name" : "Experience Read Only",
				"type" : "check",
				"value" : false
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : false,
				"name" : "Experience Book",
				"type" : "check",
				"value" : false
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 16,
				"max" : 100,
				"min" : 1,
				"name" : "Experience Book Max Moves",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 100
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "eval.nnue",
				"name" : "NNUE Eval File",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "nn-ac07bd334b62.nnue"
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 10,
				"max" : 5000,
				"min" : 0,
				"name" : "Move Overhead (ms)",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 1000
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "Eman.bin",
				"name" : "Book 1 File",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "<empty>"
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "<empty>",
				"name" : "SyzygyPath",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "<empty>"
			}
		],
		"protocol" : "uci",
		"stderrFile" : "",
		"whitepov" : true,
		"ponder" : false,
		"variants" : [
			"standard",
			"fischerandom"
		],
		"workingDirectory" : "E:\\JEUX\\CUTECHESS GUI\\moteurs\\eman"
	}
]
eman_vs_ponder.cmd :

Code: Select all

@cutechess-cli -engine conf="12T Eman ponder on" -engine conf="24T Eman ponder off" -each tc=60+1 -games 40 -openings file="20_court.pgn" start=1 -pgnout "eman_vs_ponder.pgn" fi -repeat -recover -concurrency 1 -maxmoves 200 -draw movenumber=40 movecount=5 score=10 -tb "C:\Syzygy" -tbpieces 6 -event %computername% -site "dual xeon e5-2660v3" -ratinginterval 10
@pause
Ordo :

Code: Select all

   # PLAYER                 :  RATING  ERROR  POINTS  PLAYED   (%)    W    D    L  D(%)  OppAvg  OppN
   1 24T Eman ponder off    :       9     82    20.5      40  51.3    2   37    1  92.5       0     1
   2 12T Eman ponder on     :       0   ----    19.5      40  48.8    1   37    2  92.5       9     1

White advantage = -26.35 +/- 40.87
Draw rate (equal opponents) = 50.00 % +/- 0.00
pgnStats eman_vs_ponder.pgn :
12T Eman ponder on with 1/40 wins (2,50%, D42/32, 1 620 ms) :

1. g4 @ 100,00%

24T Eman ponder off with 2/40 wins (5,00%, D43/40, 1 784 ms) :

1. f3 @ 50,00%
1. g4 @ 50,00%

Averages :
181 sec/game
109 plies/game
Thanks to 24 threads, "ponder off" saw 1 deeper ply in average and 8 deeper plies in max.

I take the first game as an example to understand what happened between both engines :
Image
In this game :
> thanks to 24 threads, "ponder off" saw 2 deeper plies in average despite a shorter time/move
> +83 seconds of analysis (+80% extra work) were useless for "ponder on"

I looked at the 40 games and "ponder on" almost lost in game #3 and failed to win the game #22.

ENJOY !

edit : https://mega.nz/file/yxRGUZDK#YwvOgHFOQoVEV7SbuU70s4rM1LmBRlpaCXT-TncEFFg
If your a owner of
2x E5-2660 v3 , which supports up to 20 Physical cores

Then, just a waste of time...a meaningless test for sure...sorry to say that...

Do you know why ? you are missing a lot of things again...

What I can suggest:
Disable HT from bios and re-run the test again...and let's see what will be the results

Otherwise as in your current test, all is wrong...

And if you need more help, about
How many cores per engine, which GUI etc..,
Do not hesitate to ask...ready to help

Greetings
Last edited by Sedat Canbaz on 16/01/2022, 14:29, edited 2 times in total.
Peter Grayson
Forum Contributions
Points: 31 638,00 
Posts: 658
Joined: 07/11/2019, 17:19
Status: Offline (Active 4 Hours, 5 Minutes ago)
Topics: 170
Reputation: 3317
Location: Newport, South Wales, UK
Has thanked: 2790 times
Been thanked: 2389 times

Re: Permanent Brain

Post by Peter Grayson »

Sedat Canbaz wrote: 15/01/2022, 21:54
I do not know what do you mean, from where did you get this data ?
Or simply Is this as joke ? according to my official ranking e.g
SCCT - Deep Brain Rating, here the right standings:

Code: Select all

 # PLAYER             : RATING    POINTS    GAMES   (%)
 7 Ponder ON 1CPU     : 3500.0     295.5     700   42.2%
 8 Ponder OFF 1CPU    : 3435.3     187.5     516   36.3%

Code: Select all

1   Ponder ON 1CPU   +52/-12/=186 58.00%  145.0/250
2   Ponder OFF 1CPU  +12/-52/=186 42.00%  105.0/250
More than 50 Elo difference is recorded...via direct matches
Via Ordo..vs overall, the Elo difference is close to 60 Elo difference
Please check more carefully next time..

Btw, what do you think about my latest test via Ponder OFF ?
http://outskirts.altervista.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=95&t=11&start=1730
2 games are recorded as lost on time...only in 12 games...

Greetings
Yes, you are right that was my mistake. I had left the filter game length at 50 moves when checking the influence of ponder on against game length that confirmed ponder on gave benefit with progressive game length as would be expected.

However, none of the games you present actually represent the match conditions posed in the original question that was "Is it better to run with 2cores/4threads ponder on or 4 cores/8threads ponder off for match conditions on the same machine?".

The closest match was with 2core ponder on versus 4 core ponder off match that with just one win difference provided an inconclusive result.

Presumably that was run on two machines when the 2 core ponder on engine would enjoy unchallenged access to memory and disk that would not be the case with two ponder on engines running on the same machine.

If the game was played on the same machine using two GUIs it still failed to meet the question conditions because the 4 core ponder off engine would not have enjoyed free access to memory and disk that it would otherwise have enjoyed against another ponder off engine because the two core ponder on engine would challenge for memory and disk on the same machine.

The question cannot be answered by running matches because the conditions cannot be reproduced.

You generate much computer chess interest with the engine matches and book tests that you run and publish for which I applaud you but unfortunately you do not seem to understand the technical aspects of how your machine(s) work when running engine matches.

Thus to answer the question, I stand by the science; you stand by unrepresentative games. Never the Twain shall meet!

Peter
Sedat Canbaz
I've been banned!
Points: 49 635,00 
Forum Contributions
Posts: 1840
Joined: 04/11/2019, 3:02
Status: Offline (Active 7 Months, 3 Weeks, 1 Day, 14 Hours, 33 Minutes ago)
Topics: 17
Reputation: 5880
1
Has thanked: 1742 times
Been thanked: 5098 times

Re: Permanent Brain

Post by Sedat Canbaz »

Peter Grayson wrote: 16/01/2022, 14:26
Sedat Canbaz wrote: 15/01/2022, 21:54
I do not know what do you mean, from where did you get this data ?
Or simply Is this as joke ? according to my official ranking e.g
SCCT - Deep Brain Rating, here the right standings:

Code: Select all

 # PLAYER             : RATING    POINTS    GAMES   (%)
 7 Ponder ON 1CPU     : 3500.0     295.5     700   42.2%
 8 Ponder OFF 1CPU    : 3435.3     187.5     516   36.3%

Code: Select all

1   Ponder ON 1CPU   +52/-12/=186 58.00%  145.0/250
2   Ponder OFF 1CPU  +12/-52/=186 42.00%  105.0/250
More than 50 Elo difference is recorded...via direct matches
Via Ordo..vs overall, the Elo difference is close to 60 Elo difference
Please check more carefully next time..

Btw, what do you think about my latest test via Ponder OFF ?
http://outskirts.altervista.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=95&t=11&start=1730
2 games are recorded as lost on time...only in 12 games...

Greetings
Yes, you are right that was my mistake. I had left the filter game length at 50 moves when checking the influence of ponder on against game length that confirmed ponder on gave benefit with progressive game length as would be expected.

However, none of the games you present actually represent the match conditions posed in the original question that was "Is it better to run with 2cores/4threads ponder on or 4 cores/8threads ponder off for match conditions on the same machine?".

The closest match was with 2core ponder on versus 4 core ponder off match that with just one win difference provided an inconclusive result.

Presumably that was run on two machines when the 2 core ponder on engine would enjoy unchallenged access to memory and disk that would not be the case with two ponder on engines running on the same machine.

If the game was played on the same machine using two GUIs it still failed to meet the question conditions because the 4 core ponder off engine would not have enjoyed free access to memory and disk that it would otherwise have enjoyed against another ponder off engine because the two core ponder on engine would challenge for memory and disk on the same machine.

The question cannot be answered by running matches because the conditions cannot be reproduced.

You generate much computer chess interest with the engine matches and book tests that you run and publish for which I applaud you but unfortunately you do not seem to understand the technical aspects of how your machine(s) work when running engine matches.

Thus to answer the question, I stand by the science; you stand by unrepresentative games. Never the Twain shall meet!

Peter
No no...all my testings are meaningless, because I run PONDER ON
I have started yesterday these testings...for this reason,
And in case of next time, before running any test...I may ask a help from you..)

And it seems,
You are the biggest expert that I have ever seen...!! you know everything right ?
That's why I think you must know all these issues...should not be so hard for you...
So one last question, it seems you missed,e.g I asked before...

Can not explain please about the time loses on my latest test via Ponder OFF
And Why when is Ponder ON, Cfish does not loose on time.. ?

Thanks
unofficial
I've been banned!
Points: 6 000,00 
Posts: 99
Joined: 25/10/2021, 16:20
Status: Offline (Active 1 Year, 5 Months, 1 Week, 1 Day, 15 Hours, 1 Minute ago)
Topics: 6
Reputation: 752
1
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 266 times

Re: Permanent Brain

Post by unofficial »

hardware : win7 64 pro sp1, e5-1650v4, hyperthreading on, ecc registered ram
gui : cutechess-cli.exe -concurrency 1 -maxmoves 200 -draw movenumber=40 movecount=5 score=10 -tb "C:\Syzygy" -tbpieces 6
engines : Eman 7.80 AVX2, nn-ac07bd334b62.nnue (last green net), tc 1min+1sec, hash 1GB, move overhead 1sec
openings : 20 first legal moves with reversed colors => 40 games

engines.json :

Code: Select all

[
	{
		"command" : "Eman 7.80 64-bit AVX2.exe",
		"name" : "4T Eman ponder on",
		"options" : [
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 24,
				"max" : 100,
				"min" : -100,
				"name" : "Contempt",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 0
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : true,
				"name" : "Dynamic Contempt",
				"type" : "check",
				"value" : true
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 1,
				"max" : 512,
				"min" : 1,
				"name" : "Threads",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 4
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 16,
				"max" : 33554432,
				"min" : 1,
				"name" : "Hash",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 1024
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "Eman.exp",
				"name" : "Experience File",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "bureau1.exp"
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : false,
				"name" : "Experience Read Only",
				"type" : "check",
				"value" : false
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : false,
				"name" : "Experience Book",
				"type" : "check",
				"value" : false
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 16,
				"max" : 100,
				"min" : 1,
				"name" : "Experience Book Max Moves",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 100
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "eval.nnue",
				"name" : "NNUE Eval File",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "nn-ac07bd334b62.nnue"
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 10,
				"max" : 5000,
				"min" : 0,
				"name" : "Move Overhead (ms)",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 1000
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "Eman.bin",
				"name" : "Book 1 File",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "<empty>"
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "<empty>",
				"name" : "SyzygyPath",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "<empty>"
			}
		],
		"protocol" : "uci",
		"stderrFile" : "",
		"whitepov" : true,
		"ponder" : true,
		"variants" : [
			"standard",
			"fischerandom"
		],
		"workingDirectory" : "E:\\JEUX\\CUTECHESS GUI\\moteurs\\eman"
	},
	{
		"command" : "Eman 7.80 64-bit AVX2.exe",
		"name" : "8T Eman ponder off",
		"options" : [
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 24,
				"max" : 100,
				"min" : -100,
				"name" : "Contempt",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 0
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : true,
				"name" : "Dynamic Contempt",
				"type" : "check",
				"value" : true
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 1,
				"max" : 512,
				"min" : 1,
				"name" : "Threads",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 8
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 16,
				"max" : 33554432,
				"min" : 1,
				"name" : "Hash",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 1024
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "Eman.exp",
				"name" : "Experience File",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "bureau2.exp"
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : false,
				"name" : "Experience Read Only",
				"type" : "check",
				"value" : false
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : false,
				"name" : "Experience Book",
				"type" : "check",
				"value" : false
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 16,
				"max" : 100,
				"min" : 1,
				"name" : "Experience Book Max Moves",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 100
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "eval.nnue",
				"name" : "NNUE Eval File",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "nn-ac07bd334b62.nnue"
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : 10,
				"max" : 5000,
				"min" : 0,
				"name" : "Move Overhead (ms)",
				"type" : "spin",
				"value" : 1000
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "Eman.bin",
				"name" : "Book 1 File",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "<empty>"
			},
			{
				"alias" : "",
				"default" : "<empty>",
				"name" : "SyzygyPath",
				"type" : "text",
				"value" : "<empty>"
			}
		],
		"protocol" : "uci",
		"stderrFile" : "",
		"whitepov" : true,
		"ponder" : false,
		"variants" : [
			"standard",
			"fischerandom"
		],
		"workingDirectory" : "E:\\JEUX\\CUTECHESS GUI\\moteurs\\eman"
	}
]
eman_vs_ponder.cmd :

Code: Select all

@cutechess-cli -engine conf="4T Eman ponder on" -engine conf="8T Eman ponder off" -each tc=60+1 -games 40 -openings file="20_court.pgn" start=1 -pgnout "eman_vs_ponder.pgn" fi -repeat -recover -concurrency 1 -maxmoves 200 -draw movenumber=40 movecount=5 score=10 -tb "C:\Syzygy" -tbpieces 6 -event %computername% -site "xeon e5-1650v4" -ratinginterval 10
@pause
Ordo :

Code: Select all

   # PLAYER                :  RATING  ERROR  POINTS  PLAYED   (%)    W    D    L  D(%)  OppAvg  OppN
   1 8T Eman ponder off    :       9     81    20.5      40  51.3    1   39    0  97.5       0     1
   2 4T Eman ponder on     :       0   ----    19.5      40  48.8    0   39    1  97.5       9     1

White advantage = -8.77 +/- 41.24
Draw rate (equal opponents) = 50.00 % +/- 0.00
pgnStats eman_vs_ponder.pgn :
4T Eman ponder on with 0/40 wins (0.00%, D36/54, 1 593 ms) :

1. g4 @ 0,00%

8T Eman ponder off with 1/40 wins (2,50%, D36/51, 1 777 ms) :

1. g4 @ 100,00%

Averages :
164 sec/game
99 plies/game
The extra time allowed "ponder on" to see as deep in average and 3 deeper plies in max.

I take the first game as an example to understand what happened between both engines :
Image
In this game :
> thanks to the extra time, "ponder on" saw 1 deeper ply in average despite his lower number of threads
> +95 seconds of analysis (+89% extra work) were useless for "ponder on"

I looked at the 40 games and "ponder on" almost lost in game #31 and failed to win the game #28.

ENJOY !

all files : https://mega.nz/file/ixpyQBCJ#nV93kqtduneRj8tGcwAd6i2lPvOSI_0laxk75MdoJuo
Sedat Canbaz
I've been banned!
Points: 49 635,00 
Forum Contributions
Posts: 1840
Joined: 04/11/2019, 3:02
Status: Offline (Active 7 Months, 3 Weeks, 1 Day, 14 Hours, 33 Minutes ago)
Topics: 17
Reputation: 5880
1
Has thanked: 1742 times
Been thanked: 5098 times

Re: Permanent Brain

Post by Sedat Canbaz »

After checking 2x E5-2660 v3 played results (by unofficial tester)
Btw, it seems he missed to check my replays ... )) but no problem...I will try to help anyway...!)

I realized to run a new serious test again,
At least under better conditions (than unofficial tester )
Because 2x E5-2660 v3's played results can not be taken very seriously !
The reason,
unofficial tester is used to play Ponder OFF 24 Threads vs Ponder ON 12 Threads
It seems, he mixed the apples with oranges...just saying...
Not so clear ? then:
Ponder ON performs much better with physical cores on older machines (via HT OFF)

Still not so clear ? I am running Auto232 matches since a long time
And so far, I produced thousands of Auto232 games for sure...
If any beginner... in Auto232 mode testing needs help...really I will try to help...
Auto232 matches...it is my job...and once more:
For any questions...please do not hesitate to ask...

And according to my experience, for maximum performance and strength:
Under 20 core machine is recommended max. 10 core vs 10 core (Ponder ON e.g for both sides)
Even will be better and safer to be played 8 Core vs 8 Core, sure I mean in case of Ponder ON

Another example, for maximum performance and strength:
In case of Ponder ON vs Ponder OFF: then I strongly recommend:
1st Hyper-Threading to be disabled...later :
Ponder OFF 10 Core Vs Ponder ON 5 Core to be played...

Because I am owner of 2x E5-2686 v3...e.g same architecture as his E5-2660 v3
I mean, based on my many testings:
MP + Ponder ON suffer on same machine..if HT is NOT disabled....
At least not so stable for overall chess engines, I can say...

On other hand,
Actually this is already known issue since a long time that,
In case of Ponder ON matches on same PC,
HT should be disabled always with these kind of architecture processors!

Plus via NNUE, I mean via assistance is really not good choice for sure...
And I believe in that,
Much better if these kind of testings to be played as NON-NNUE!
And at least to be used Blitz time control..but not recommended Bullet
Sure anyone is free...but Bullet testings can not be taken so much seriously...

Plus I had bad experience via Cutechess, e.g much better Arena or Ftitz or Shredder Classic:
https://sites.google.com/site/computerschess/scct-gui-engine-testings

Ok.. here is my new plan:
Ponder ON 4CPU vs Ponder OFF 8CPU

2x E5-2686 machine
Fritz GUI, Arena GUI
Hyper-Threading OFF
Large Page OFF
Brainfish 151019 BMI2
TC 3 minutes
512 MB hash
Perfect 2022 book

All of the planning matches will be played in Auto232 mode (via Autoplayer)

More details soon...

Have fun )
Sedat
Sedat Canbaz
I've been banned!
Points: 49 635,00 
Forum Contributions
Posts: 1840
Joined: 04/11/2019, 3:02
Status: Offline (Active 7 Months, 3 Weeks, 1 Day, 14 Hours, 33 Minutes ago)
Topics: 17
Reputation: 5880
1
Has thanked: 1742 times
Been thanked: 5098 times

Re: Permanent Brain

Post by Sedat Canbaz »

Meanwhile, just I'd like to add...perhaps my experience will help....
For example,
In the past, when I was as frequent Playchess player during 2008-2009,
https://sites.google.com/site/computerschess/playchess-rating-may-october-2009

My i7-920 machine is played with HT as disabled...
For example,, to be sure...which is better HT OFF or HT ON...
Before...I ran many HT benchmarks...so later when I was sure ...I started to play online...

And not only Rybka engine, plus many other engines performed better via HT as disabled...

Sure I mean for older INTEL processors...

Regarding my latest Ryzen7 4800H machine,
HT ON is slightly better than HT OFF

It seems,
Latest AMD's Hyper-Threading architecture is improved over the past years!

But I can not say same words for my 2x E5-2686 machine
I get better results when HT as disabled...

Btw, for anyone missed
I have some experience with CPU benchmarks too, not much but I have:
https://sites.google.com/site/computerschess/benchmarks

Hopes help,
Sedat
Sedat Canbaz
I've been banned!
Points: 49 635,00 
Forum Contributions
Posts: 1840
Joined: 04/11/2019, 3:02
Status: Offline (Active 7 Months, 3 Weeks, 1 Day, 14 Hours, 33 Minutes ago)
Topics: 17
Reputation: 5880
1
Has thanked: 1742 times
Been thanked: 5098 times

Re: Permanent Brain

Post by Sedat Canbaz »

For anyone interested,( at least a correct test):
http://outskirts.altervista.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=95&t=11&p=41684#p41684

And do not forget to click THANKS button
Because next time..I may not help ...))

All of you are Great experts...really tomorrow I will be not much surprised..
if anyone will start to give me lessons in book making..))


Have fun,
Sedat
unofficial
I've been banned!
Points: 6 000,00 
Posts: 99
Joined: 25/10/2021, 16:20
Status: Offline (Active 1 Year, 5 Months, 1 Week, 1 Day, 15 Hours, 1 Minute ago)
Topics: 6
Reputation: 752
1
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 266 times

Re: Permanent Brain

Post by unofficial »

"Maximum performance and strength" can't be achieved with a several years old engine without last green net on an unpowered hardware because :
- without hyperthreading, the last sf releases lose until 40% of speed, it's a big problem with lazysmp because it isn't optimized for time-to-depth
- with a reduced number of threads, the evaluations get a reduced among of data and give less accurate scores
- without using "large page", "numa", "avx", "bmi", the last sf releases see their speed again more reduced
- without using the recent nnue technology, the last sf releases lose hundreds of elo so we don't look at "maximum strength"
- without using a learning function, the engine strength stays the same even after 1 billion games, so these games are totally useless for the engine

Since nnue era, "ponder on" became useless on a single hardware, no gain with twice more time at half number of threads, no gain with 1 or 2 deeper plies.
unofficial
I've been banned!
Points: 6 000,00 
Posts: 99
Joined: 25/10/2021, 16:20
Status: Offline (Active 1 Year, 5 Months, 1 Week, 1 Day, 15 Hours, 1 Minute ago)
Topics: 6
Reputation: 752
1
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 266 times

Re: Permanent Brain

Post by unofficial »

This is not serious to use several years old engines (brainfish 151019, houdini, fritz) without nnue technology in order to advise the "ponder on" setting for a single 8-core machine running modern engines with net !
Sedat Canbaz
I've been banned!
Points: 49 635,00 
Forum Contributions
Posts: 1840
Joined: 04/11/2019, 3:02
Status: Offline (Active 7 Months, 3 Weeks, 1 Day, 14 Hours, 33 Minutes ago)
Topics: 17
Reputation: 5880
1
Has thanked: 1742 times
Been thanked: 5098 times

Re: Permanent Brain

Post by Sedat Canbaz »

1st of all,
NNUE is not everything..really..at least for my side!

Perhaps you suggest all benchmark tools to switch to NNUE engine ?)))
Come on...do not get me more lough...)))
Yes...Brainfish is released in 2019 year, but better in my eyes
Btw, why I have to use NNUE engine, which forfeits on time at 3min, Ponder OFF ??
Can you explain Me please only this ? than you in advance..

And exception that,
You are talking and talking, but just
In case of SCCT, you say Elo error bar margin...20+ Elo etc
What about your current testings ? is this as joke ??
Why you run only 40 games ? where is your data, such 4000 games ??
I told you..once more..your testings are meaningless!
Once more,
Ponder ON performs better with HT OFF..at least on E5-2686, i7-920 etc machines
I expect on 2660 v3 too...

To be more clear,
Via NNUE (using Evalfile) is not so good idea to check any:
-Opening book performance,
-Real engine strength,
-Hardware CPU speed
etc.
Btw, you can ask any experienced Playchess player
Who has high-end machine..and many of them will complain
Do you know why ?? later I think you can find the answer

Do you want Me to count more..or enough ?

On other hand,
NNUE is good..for mainly for solving positions etc...
No doubt, it plays stronger, but this is also true: boring! a lot of draws...
Btw, however, for anyone interested,
I've lost my interest over NNUE, for other several reasons too...
For more details,
https://sites.google.com/site/computerschess/some-notes-about-chess
Not so clear ? then
Via huge assistance (EvalFile) any fool can play better, stronger..

Still not so clear ?? ok then, e.g in case of using NNUE, for example:
Something like ...if we will use same Deep opening book (for both sides)
Any Hardware benchmark speed test can be affected...bad idea I mean..
In the past, I ran many benchmarks using various hardwares
A small note, I used a short book (Perfect book) for both sides
That was as correct, and right system...but as NON-NNUE of course.. just saying again...
NNUE (Evalfile) is based on previous played, learned data, right ??
Sure not same thing... but quite similar as deep opening books...
However..there is one true: in both cases.. NNUE engines gain...

Ok...that's all over these issue, sorry that I can not spend my free time more...
And his time all this hope helps !)

Best,
Sedat
unofficial
I've been banned!
Points: 6 000,00 
Posts: 99
Joined: 25/10/2021, 16:20
Status: Offline (Active 1 Year, 5 Months, 1 Week, 1 Day, 15 Hours, 1 Minute ago)
Topics: 6
Reputation: 752
1
Has thanked: 16 times
Been thanked: 266 times

Re: Permanent Brain

Post by unofficial »

Sorry for you Sedat if chess stopped in 2019 in your eyes.
But for the rest of the world, chess continued to progress !

If your hardware is misconfigured, it's no wonder you've time forfeits.
With the same material, we don't have any !

Your tests with an old version of Brainfish on 2 pc do not answer Oliprog's questions :
Oliprog wrote: 14/01/2022, 2:32 Hello friends, I just realized that in my tests I am using the engines with Permanent Brain On by default and not as I thought it was deactivated, I do not know if I change something at some point in my configuration with an update, the question is It is convenient for me to use Permanent Brain activated or not?
Greetings
Oliprog wrote: 14/01/2022, 16:05 Thanks for your answer Ian! When I do my tests, I don't use the pc for something else to see if I understood you correctly, so on my 8-core pc, can I leave the configuration as I have it for Permanent brain On of 4 threads for each engine?
Greetings
The closer we get to 4000 elo, the more we will have draws and it is certainly not "ponder on" that will prevent them !

With 2 x 40 games, I demonstrated that "ponder on" was useless on a single machine.
With 2 machines and millions games, you had to turn off all the upgrades and use an old engine to find a point to "ponder on".

I work with online players and none of them dare to halve the power of their machine, nor to use old engines without the last green net and even less to deactivate the speed accelerators.
Sedat Canbaz
I've been banned!
Points: 49 635,00 
Forum Contributions
Posts: 1840
Joined: 04/11/2019, 3:02
Status: Offline (Active 7 Months, 3 Weeks, 1 Day, 14 Hours, 33 Minutes ago)
Topics: 17
Reputation: 5880
1
Has thanked: 1742 times
Been thanked: 5098 times

Re: Permanent Brain

Post by Sedat Canbaz »

unofficial wrote: 18/01/2022, 10:35 Sorry for you Sedat if chess stopped in 2019 in your eyes.
But for the rest of the world, chess continued to progress !

If your hardware is misconfigured, it's no wonder you've time forfeits.
With the same material, we don't have any !

Your tests with an old version of Brainfish on 2 pc do not answer Oliprog's questions :
Oliprog wrote: 14/01/2022, 2:32 Hello friends, I just realized that in my tests I am using the engines with Permanent Brain On by default and not as I thought it was deactivated, I do not know if I change something at some point in my configuration with an update, the question is It is convenient for me to use Permanent Brain activated or not?
Greetings
Oliprog wrote: 14/01/2022, 16:05 Thanks for your answer Ian! When I do my tests, I don't use the pc for something else to see if I understood you correctly, so on my 8-core pc, can I leave the configuration as I have it for Permanent brain On of 4 threads for each engine?
Greetings
The closer we get to 4000 elo, the more we will have draws and it is certainly not "ponder on" that will prevent them !

With 2 x 40 games, I demonstrated that "ponder on" was useless on a single machine.
With 2 machines and millions games, you had to turn off all the upgrades and use an old engine to find a point to "ponder on".

I work with online players and none of them dare to halve the power of their machine, nor to use old engines without the last green net and even less to deactivate the speed accelerators.

Just a moment, to be more clear
Sure I would prefer to live in 2019 even earlier...
instead of to live in latest days, to see such as corona etc. ))
Ok..just joking...)

On other hand, in every joke..there is a true...
I explained you about why I prefer Brainfish..
I will prefer even earlier versions.in case of better..
For me the stability is most important part, ok ?

Let's assume my hardwares such as E5-2686, or i7-920 are buggy..
I mean not so stable...
Then..one simple question..I hardly doubt you can answer, anyway then,
How I managed to be Number ONE via i7-920 as HT OFF in 2009 on Playcherss ?
No doubt that, HT OFF played a role...in those times many opponents preferred as HT ON

And still not so clear ? then why no any lost game on time as ponder on:
https://sites.google.com/site/computerschess/scct-book-cs-59

But as ponder off...we see time forfeits....???

Btw another simple question, why many of latest NNUE engines forfeits on time too??
Even on my Ryzen machine, maybe again I have something wrong with configurations:
https://sites.google.com/site/computerschess/scct-duel3-nn-vs-book

Then you will notice again time forfeits...listen we are in 2022
But we have not so stable NNUE engines...prove that I am wrong..
I hardly you ever can manage...you just looking for holes over my work..
And next time please...

Regarding Olibrog or any other chess friend,
I just tried to help...only for Computer Chess progress, ok ?
If you have difficulties to see the reality...it is your problem, not mine..
But however I respect...anyone is free...to run at any conditions

Good luck to all
Peter Grayson
Forum Contributions
Points: 31 638,00 
Posts: 658
Joined: 07/11/2019, 17:19
Status: Offline (Active 4 Hours, 5 Minutes ago)
Topics: 170
Reputation: 3317
Location: Newport, South Wales, UK
Has thanked: 2790 times
Been thanked: 2389 times

Re: Permanent Brain

Post by Peter Grayson »

Sedat Canbaz wrote: 16/01/2022, 14:39 No no...all my testings are meaningless, because I run PONDER ON
I have started yesterday these testings...for this reason,
And in case of next time, before running any test...I may ask a help from you..)

And it seems,
You are the biggest expert that I have ever seen...!! you know everything right ?
That's why I think you must know all these issues...should not be so hard for you...
So one last question, it seems you missed,e.g I asked before...

Can not explain please about the time loses on my latest test via Ponder OFF
And Why when is Ponder ON, Cfish does not loose on time.. ?

Thanks
Having worked in engineering for 44 years there is a well used proverb that is probably equally applied to running chess matches. "Experience gained is directly proportional to the number of mistakes made".

For your attention ...

There is another issue with playing games on 2 PCs with ponder off and ponder on that is exacerbated by fast blitz games. There is an RS232 data transmission and data handling time cost for each transmitted move.

The 4 core ponder on games record confirms the minimum time to send and then receive and interpret the 8 core ponder off move data is close to one second. Therefore in addition to the ponder hit gain while the 8 core ponder off machine is "thinking" the 4 core ponder off engine also enjoys a further bias in its favour of an additional 1 second per move for each ponder hit. The 8 core ponder off engine cannot benefit from this on the return move.

For a typical 90 move game and a conservative 60% ponder hit rate this would give the ponder on engine an extra 48 seconds plus the ponder hit time gain based on 10 moves openings book = 80 moves x 60% = 48s at 1 s/move time delay.

This would not be such an issue for long time controls but at Game in 180s an additional 48 seconds is a massive advantage for the ponder on engine and disadvantage for the ponder off engine that inevitably distorts the result. Certainly a 1 second time bonus for each ponder hit in the usual mad time scramble ending is significant.

As for time losses, other than the engine being unable to apportion sufficient time to manage the game length that is a very difficult task for longer games, the only time I have experienced time losses was with the introduction of Windows 10. The power plan advanced settings need to be checked to ensure the disk drive is not being shut down that will introduce a time delay to restart the disk when Syzygy or Nalimov Table bases need to be accessed.

The inactivity measurement criteria is based on no keyboard or mouse activity to determine the start of idle time that begins the countdown to shutting off the hard drive. Some anti-virus and protection software also use this too but they are best disabled for matches.

On my later machines Syzygy bases were installed on the SSD but Nalimov bases remained on the hard disk and were used by the GUI. The time loss issue in this case was not caused by the engine but by the GUI waiting for hard disk access when the game went into a 6-man Nalimov endgame position. Adjusting the hard drive time out to never shut down overcame the issue. The time should be set to 0 (zero).

Peter
Sedat Canbaz
I've been banned!
Points: 49 635,00 
Forum Contributions
Posts: 1840
Joined: 04/11/2019, 3:02
Status: Offline (Active 7 Months, 3 Weeks, 1 Day, 14 Hours, 33 Minutes ago)
Topics: 17
Reputation: 5880
1
Has thanked: 1742 times
Been thanked: 5098 times

Re: Permanent Brain

Post by Sedat Canbaz »

Peter Grayson wrote: 18/01/2022, 15:51
Sedat Canbaz wrote: 16/01/2022, 14:39 No no...all my testings are meaningless, because I run PONDER ON
I have started yesterday these testings...for this reason,
And in case of next time, before running any test...I may ask a help from you..)

And it seems,
You are the biggest expert that I have ever seen...!! you know everything right ?
That's why I think you must know all these issues...should not be so hard for you...
So one last question, it seems you missed,e.g I asked before...

Can not explain please about the time loses on my latest test via Ponder OFF
And Why when is Ponder ON, Cfish does not loose on time.. ?

Thanks
Having worked in engineering for 44 years there is a well used proverb that is probably equally applied to running chess matches. "Experience gained is directly proportional to the number of mistakes made".

For your attention ...

There is another issue with playing games on 2 PCs with ponder off and ponder on that is exacerbated by fast blitz games. There is an RS232 data transmission and data handling time cost for each transmitted move.

The 4 core ponder on games record confirms the minimum time to send and then receive and interpret the 8 core ponder off move data is close to one second. Therefore in addition to the ponder hit gain while the 8 core ponder off machine is "thinking" the 4 core ponder off engine also enjoys a further bias in its favour of an additional 1 second per move for each ponder hit. The 8 core ponder off engine cannot benefit from this on the return move.

For a typical 90 move game and a conservative 60% ponder hit rate this would give the ponder on engine an extra 48 seconds plus the ponder hit time gain based on 10 moves openings book = 80 moves x 60% = 48s at 1 s/move time delay.

This would not be such an issue for long time controls but at Game in 180s an additional 48 seconds is a massive advantage for the ponder on engine and disadvantage for the ponder off engine that inevitably distorts the result. Certainly a 1 second time bonus for each ponder hit in the usual mad time scramble ending is significant.

As for time losses, other than the engine being unable to apportion sufficient time to manage the game length that is a very difficult task for longer games, the only time I have experienced time losses was with the introduction of Windows 10. The power plan advanced settings need to be checked to ensure the disk drive is not being shut down that will introduce a time delay to restart the disk when Syzygy or Nalimov Table bases need to be accessed.

The inactivity measurement criteria is based on no keyboard or mouse activity to determine the start of idle time that begins the countdown to shutting off the hard drive. Some anti-virus and protection software also use this too but they are best disabled for matches.

On my later machines Syzygy bases were installed on the SSD but Nalimov bases remained on the hard disk and were used by the GUI. The time loss issue in this case was not caused by the engine but by the GUI waiting for hard disk access when the game went into a 6-man Nalimov endgame position. Adjusting the hard drive time out to never shut down overcame the issue. The time should be set to 0 (zero).

Peter

Thanks for your great saying...I like it )

However sorry to say that but,
You are not in Chess Engineering for 44 years right ?
If...correct me please...

Anyhow.
Even your 44 yeas...does not proof that Ponder OFF is better
Or maybe I am missing something ?

By the way...
I am in Chess, more than 45 years...

And now what? who says the true...?)

On other hand
I have some knowledge, plus experience too not much but I have!
And I am 25 years in engine testings, and SCCT so far produced:
Over than 2.000.000 games and mostly of them are still available!
What about your games? can you serve us.. ? I read that 1982 year
So perhaps you played millions of games too, right ?

And next time please.. less comments )
You know why? I relay mainly on useful testings and games...
Thanks...

Btw,
And let Me say please a great saying over this issue:
Actions speak louder than words!)

However, I suggest,
Let's this discussion to be ended..due to leads nowhere...

As other reason, you can not replay to my questions..
I asked you simply: Why Cfish lost on time as Ponder OFF ?
Where the same version does not loose on time as Ponder ON

Do you have difficulties..or what ?
44 engineering can not help ?

On other hand,
I expected at least you would say to increase
Move Overhead to 100 or 200 or 300 etc
Or to change the time control to such as 3min+1sec etc..

Ok...no problem...

I wish all the best...)
Sedat
Post Reply

Return to “Programming, Technical Discussions, Chess related questions etc.”