3 ms·

I too was dissapointed at the 1GB of hash given to Stockfish. Turns out that there is a good reason for 1GB of hash : it is an easy way to get a high number no

by sireat 9y ago

I too was dissapointed at the 1GB of hash given to Stockfish. Turns out that there is a good reason for 1GB of hash : it is an easy way to get a high number nodes searches per second (ie high kn/sec) on many threads. http://support.stockfishchess.org/discussions/questions/655-which-settings-are-best http://support.stockfishchess.org/discussions/questions/655-... Stockfish is a major PIA to configure to use correctly and I do not blame AlphaZero for taking the easy way out.. I turned on 30 threads for Stockfish 8 on my 2x Xeon 2670 with 64GBs of RAM and tried to adjust hash memory. When going past 1GB hash my kn/sec dropped from 25kn/sec to less than 10kn/sec It might have to do with how 2x CPU configurations work, locality, who knows. A0 should have let Stockfish use its opening book though.

vatueil 9y ago
Interesting information on reasons for choosing a 1GB hash size, thanks. > A0 should have let Stockfish use its opening book though. Has it been confirmed that it didn't? As far as I can tell, DeepMind never said that Stockfish didn't use an opening book or endgame tablebase, only that AlphaZero didn't: https://twitter.com/demishassabis/status/938347604462542849 https://twitter.com/demishassabis/status/938347604462542849 The only time opening books are mentioned in the arxiv paper is when they are described as standard components of chess engines; while it doesn't explicitly state whether Stockfish was allowed to use them in the tests, I would think it likely: https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.01815 https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.01815 The rumor that Stockfish didn't have an opening book seems widespread but unsourced.