THANKS Ferdinand, great work, much appreciated!!!!
At 5+3 Ponder on for the TOP16 it looks like this:
Code: Select all
A. Players list:
1 Andscacs 0.88
2 Booot 6.1
3 Chiron 3.01
4 Critter 1.6a
5 Equinox 3.30
6 Fizbo 1.8
7 Fritz 15
8 Ginkgo 1.8
9 Gull 3
10 Hannibal 1.7
11 Houdini 5
12 Jonny 8.00
13 Komodo 10.2
14 Protector 1.9.0
15 Shredder 13
16 Stockfish 8
B. Ponder hit and miss table:
nr player : hit miss hit% games pts%
1 Komodo 10.2 : 107261 72022 59.8 3300 52.1
2 Houdini 5 : 101643 72338 58.4 3300 52.1
3 Shredder 13 : 105672 76146 58.1 3300 52.1
4 Fritz 15 : 113329 81693 58.1 3300 52.1
5 Critter 1.6a : 113195 81988 58.0 3300 52.1
6 Stockfish 8 : 91870 66839 57.9 3300 52.1
7 Protector 1.9.0 : 104780 76961 57.7 3300 52.1
8 Chiron 3.01 : 103214 76467 57.4 3300 52.1
9 Equinox 3.30 : 108174 80217 57.4 3300 52.1
10 Booot 6.1 : 109026 81087 57.3 3300 52.1
11 Ginkgo 1.8 : 107277 80097 57.3 3300 52.1
12 Andscacs 0.88 : 114635 86850 56.9 3300 52.1
13 Gull 3 : 114069 88119 56.4 3300 52.1
14 Jonny 8.00 : 103241 82396 55.6 3300 52.1
15 Fizbo 1.8 : 108686 88565 55.1 3300 52.1
16 Hannibal 1.7 : 104148 85945 54.8 3300 52.1
Average hit % : 57.2
File : TOP16L.pgn
Date : 2016-11-30 11:47:33
Elapsed (sec) : 6435.2The ratio from 8 to 16 core is 9.55/6.62 = 1.5701. That means that the cutoff for more efficient (aka "better") games is 16 cores. 2x8core Ponder ON gives better result (qualitative better games) in average over 1x16core Ponder OFF! In other words, Ponder OFF games, played on computers with 16 cores or more, are a waste of resources!
And keep in mind this is only 5+3. If you run longer games with a higher draw rate you will end up most likely with a higher Ponder HIT rate and a higher Ponder ON advantage with lower core numbers!
WOW
Ingo
PS: Iwill check for the TOP3 engines only.
PPS: To produce equaly good games to my 5 + 3 someone has to ply 471s + 4.71s games with Ponder off (~ 8m + 4s) on equal hw
