Reminder: Stockfish is best with 2 cores

[gordonr]

I have zero interest in doing your work for you or convincing you. I work with the others who have done the testing and understand this.

I've done my own testing and continuing to do so. I'm not asking you to do work for me, I'm asking you to share some positions from the work you've supposedly already done. But there's nothing! You've provided zero evidence in this forum - not a single position to back up your hollow claim. You want to make claims with secretive proof. It's not about whether you want to convince or not; it about whether you actually can or not.

I done testing previously and more recently:

r1b1k2r/2p2pbp/3p2p1/2pPp3/p3P2Q/nP3PN1/P4K1P/3R3R w kq - 0 1 bm Nh5;
1r1rb1k1/5ppp/4p3/1p1p3P/1q2P2Q/pN3P2/PPP4P/1K1R2R1 w - - 0 1 bm Rxg7;
rnbq3r/1p2b1k1/2pp1p1p/pP3pp1/2BP3N/P3P3/2P2PPP/RN1Q1RK1 w - - 0 1 bm Ng6;
6br/1KNp1n1r/2p2p2/P1ppRP2/1kP3pP/3PBB2/PN1P4/8 w - - 0 1 bm Bxc5;
2r5/prkpR1p1/2p1ppK1/P1p1N1B1/P1P1P3/8/8/8 w - - 0 1 bm Bf4;
7k/4q1pp/3bP3/3p3P/Bp1P1r2/p2R4/2P3P1/K3Q3 b - - 0 38 bm Qf6;
r1b5/1pk2pr1/1Rp1p1q1/p1PpPp1p/P2P1Q1P/4P1P1/4B1K1/3R4 w - - 0 1 bm e4;
1r3k2/2r4p/2Pq2pP/3P1p2/2B1p3/p3Q1P1/Rb3PK1/3R4 w - - 0 1 bm Rxb2;
8/p3r2k/Pp2q3/2pQ4/K1P2p2/1P6/7P/3R4 w - - 0 1 bm Rd2;
r1bqkb1r/3n1ppp/p3p3/8/Pp1B1n2/3B1N2/1P1NQPPP/R2R2K1 w kq - 0 1 bm Qe1;
4K1k1/8/1p5p/1Pp3b1/8/1P3P2/P1B2P2/8 w - - 0 1 bm f4;
4r1rk/4BRbp/p5q1/1ppQ4/2P5/4R2P/6PK/8 w - - 0 34 bm cxb5;

2 threads: 112, 68, 50, 343, 3874, 756, 17, 26, 51, 250, 508, 235 (time in seconds to solve)
16 threads: 22, 17, 14, 464, 28, 44, 10, 3, 0, 15, 134, 50

I'll repeat these runs multiple times but so far the 16 threads was faster on 11/12 positions.

[gordonr]

Another run:

2 threads: 48, 81, 47, 619, 4114, 1351, 18, 3, 15, 21, 308, 180
16 threads: 28, 12, 7, 125, 2812, 114, 5, 0, 8, 63, 60, 16

Again, 16 threads faster for 11/12 - and the slower position is different from the 1st run. I realise that only using 12 positions is such a small sample but I'm prepared to see only a small amount of positions that show 2 threads being as good as 16 threads. And my 12 positions are from public test suites or test positions posted previously in the forum.

I looked at the discussion on Discord - interesting to see what was actually said.

[Paloma]

I downloaded some HTC file with 115 positions and it seems at least all the first 4 positions have more than one winning move so the test suite is bad.

No idea what you downloaded.
The original HTC114 test is here in the forum.
viewtopic.php?p=882236#p882236

and corrected:
viewtopic.php?p=915515#p915515

[Werewolf]

I have zero interest in doing your work for you or convincing you. I work with the others who have done the testing and understand this.

I've done my own testing and continuing to do so. I'm not asking you to do work for me, I'm asking you to share some positions from the work you've supposedly already done. But there's nothing! You've provided zero evidence in this forum - not a single position to back up your hollow claim. You want to make claims with secretive proof. It's not about whether you want to convince or not; it about whether you actually can or not.

I done testing previously and more recently:

r1b1k2r/2p2pbp/3p2p1/2pPp3/p3P2Q/nP3PN1/P4K1P/3R3R w kq - 0 1 bm Nh5;
1r1rb1k1/5ppp/4p3/1p1p3P/1q2P2Q/pN3P2/PPP4P/1K1R2R1 w - - 0 1 bm Rxg7;
rnbq3r/1p2b1k1/2pp1p1p/pP3pp1/2BP3N/P3P3/2P2PPP/RN1Q1RK1 w - - 0 1 bm Ng6;
6br/1KNp1n1r/2p2p2/P1ppRP2/1kP3pP/3PBB2/PN1P4/8 w - - 0 1 bm Bxc5;
2r5/prkpR1p1/2p1ppK1/P1p1N1B1/P1P1P3/8/8/8 w - - 0 1 bm Bf4;
7k/4q1pp/3bP3/3p3P/Bp1P1r2/p2R4/2P3P1/K3Q3 b - - 0 38 bm Qf6;
r1b5/1pk2pr1/1Rp1p1q1/p1PpPp1p/P2P1Q1P/4P1P1/4B1K1/3R4 w - - 0 1 bm e4;
1r3k2/2r4p/2Pq2pP/3P1p2/2B1p3/p3Q1P1/Rb3PK1/3R4 w - - 0 1 bm Rxb2;
8/p3r2k/Pp2q3/2pQ4/K1P2p2/1P6/7P/3R4 w - - 0 1 bm Rd2;
r1bqkb1r/3n1ppp/p3p3/8/Pp1B1n2/3B1N2/1P1NQPPP/R2R2K1 w kq - 0 1 bm Qe1;
4K1k1/8/1p5p/1Pp3b1/8/1P3P2/P1B2P2/8 w - - 0 1 bm f4;
4r1rk/4BRbp/p5q1/1ppQ4/2P5/4R2P/6PK/8 w - - 0 34 bm cxb5;

2 threads: 112, 68, 50, 343, 3874, 756, 17, 26, 51, 250, 508, 235 (time in seconds to solve)
16 threads: 22, 17, 14, 464, 28, 44, 10, 3, 0, 15, 134, 50

I'll repeat these runs multiple times but so far the 16 threads was faster on 11/12 positions.

This has sloppy written all over it.

First of all my original reply was to Jouni. I owe you no explanation at all. Funny how Jouni and I both concluded something similar independently (I don't claim 2 cores is best at tactics, just that it is equal best) - yet you missed that "coincidence".

Second of all I have been sharing test positions on this forum and on other forums for years.

But most telling is how shoddy your work is. You claim I don't provide evidence, but you haven't yourself: no engine version, no hardware details, hash not stated, TBs not stated, just some numbers that we're supposed to trust not being made up. After thinking a mere 12 positions would somehow prove your case, I find an issue with 5 of them being unsuitable! This is a remarkably high error rate!
The results you are getting is not far off what I would expect from a collection like this.
From the remainder positions I find 7 to be suitable and most of these are solved more quickly on 16 cores than 2 admittedly, but it's such a small sample size it's inconclusive.

As I said before, do your own work before making accusations and raise the quality of what you produce.