On Thu, 2006-12-07 at 08:15 -0800, Peter Drake wrote: > On Dec 6, 2006, at 9:36 PM, Don Dailey wrote: > > > The equivalent C version (after I took out some optimizations) is > > doing 13,745.70 games per second on an old pentium 4. > > I'd really love to know what I'm doing wrong. I was never able to get > more than about 6,000 games per second on a 2 GHz machine, even in C++.
Yes, I'm wondering about that too. I think even my implementation is slower than some others are getting - but there can be many differences. The machine I'm now working on is a 2.4 GHz pentium 4, a little better than what I had before but I'm upgraded next month to a really fast dual core AMD. Are you trying to keep a lot of information updated? Mine only tries to play random games as fast as possible. It does not have the ability to undo moves - this is easily handled by copying state when you need this feature. There is also about a 2 to 1 slowdown if you are not finding the random legal moves properly. I don't know if you are or not, but look at the recent emails on this, one of mine and one by Lex Luthor - or was it Lukasz Lew? I have a feeling one or both these things are hurting you. I think even the Java implementation should do better. For reference, the machine I'm now working on is an old, but not too old 2.4 GHz pentium 4, a little better than what I had before but I'm upgraded next month to a really fast dual core AMD! I can't wait. I think YOUR machine actually should be performing just a little bit better than mine in general - but I'm not 100% sure as I'm not a processor guru. - Don > Peter Drake > Assistant Professor of Computer Science > Lewis & Clark College > http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/ > _______________________________________________ > computer-go mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
