oh, my benchmarked numbers are singlethreaded... quad threaded it actually runs about 3-3.5 times as fast
2014-05-09 23:55 GMT+02:00 Marc Landgraf <mahrgel...@gmail.com>: > simple ko checks are sufficient in random playouts ;) limit the number of > moves to something reasonable (like 3 times the fields on the board) and > you will catch that one in a billion games superko. This should save a fair > amount of time. > In any case... Your speed sounds reasonable. You can optimize it further > later on, once you know what exactly you need from your board > implementation. Have fun with your tree :) > > My current implementation runs at 100k playouts 9x9 in 7 sec on an > i7-3630, 8GB, but has a bit heavier playouts. (saving/capturing, mogo style > 3x3 patterns, basic dead shapes, some fun about keeping/destroying eyes > properly) > > Marc > > > 2014-05-09 23:35 GMT+02:00 Ben Ellis <ben.el...@softweyr.co.uk>: > > I've made a start on my first attempt at writing a go playing program >> using the .NET framework, and with 1000 empty 9x9 random playouts I'm >> getting the following benchmarks, >> >> Single Threaded (uses about 30% CPU) >> VS DEBUG 64bit (with Debugger) - 266ms per 1000 playouts. >> VS RELEASE 64bit - 182ms per 1000 playouts >> >> Thread Per Core (Uses 100% CPU) (Thread Per Core - 1 yielded similar >> results) >> VS DEBUG 64bit (with Debugger) - 154ms per 1000 playouts. >> VS RELEASE 64bit - 111ms per 1000 playouts >> >> System Specifications: >> Processor: Intel Core i7-4600U CPU @ 2.10Ghz >> 8GB DDR3 RAM >> >> The random player won't play, >> >> - Positional super-ko moves (or optionally situational) >> - Suicide moves >> - Eye filling moves >> >> and continues to play until there are no good moves left (i.e. all empty >> intersections are an eye, suicide or unplayable due to ko) >> >> Am I missing any other checks/features to the random play outs that would >> normally be implemented? >> >> What sort of play out speeds are normal, should I spend any more >> optimizing the random play outs before moving into a Monty-Carlo >> implementation? >> >> Regards, >> >> Ben >> >> >> On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 11:09 PM, Jason House <jason.james.ho...@gmail.com >> > wrote: >> >>> Simple ko checks are required in playouts. Advanced ko checks are >>> typically restricted to inside the search tree. With simple ko checks, I've >>> had playouts get stuck in a 3 ko cycle. Ko cycles can be caught with a >>> maximum playout length. >>> On May 7, 2014 10:46 AM, "Álvaro Begué" <alvaro.be...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> I believe you *have to* check for simple ko in playouts. Otherwise >>>> you'll end up with infinite playouts quite easily. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 9:09 AM, Ben Ellis <ben.el...@softweyr.co.uk>wrote: >>>> >>>>> All, >>>>> >>>>> When playing random playouts, do you (anyone) bother checking for >>>>> KO or super KO? Does this have a negative impact on accuracy of the >>>>> win:loss outcomes? >>>>> >>>>> Ben >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, May 1, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Marc Landgraf <mahrgel...@gmail.com>wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Now I feel stupid :( >>>>>> Thanks... >>>>>> So now I'm down to 126 on average with /O2 /Ot /favor:INTEL64 (+the >>>>>> usual fluff) >>>>>> This is still about 15% slower then mingw-w64, but this is just for >>>>>> singlethreaded playouts. >>>>>> And it looks like, that when using 4 threads on the same tree, this >>>>>> gets compensated, and we arrive at pretty much the same speed. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> 2014-05-01 15:36 GMT+02:00 Harald Johnsen <hjohn...@evc.net>: >>>>>> >>>>>> Le 01/05/2014 13:00, Marc Landgraf a écrit : >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hey, >>>>>>>> I'm not talking about 20% speedloss here with VC++. >>>>>>>> Just the times for 1000 empty playouts on 9x9, not using any sort >>>>>>>> of multithreading: >>>>>>>> VS debug configuration: 15257 >>>>>>>> VS release config (optimized): 756 >>>>>>>> C::B mingw-w64 no optimizations: 498 >>>>>>>> C::B mingw-w64 -O3 -fexpensive-optimizations -march=corei7-avx: 108 >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This of course clearly looks as this is certainly my fault... But >>>>>>>> right now I can't find what I'm doing wrong here... and so I have to >>>>>>>> miss >>>>>>>> out those handy VS-comfort features and continue with C::B + mingw-w64. >>>>>>>> And the VS profiler results looks pretty much like what I got, when >>>>>>>> I last used VerySleepy on my code compiled with mingw. No super drastic >>>>>>>> bottlenecks just general slowness it seems. >>>>>>>> Mingw-w64 makes it impossible to profile the code, but mingw has >>>>>>>> performance issues as well for me, so I'm using it only when i need >>>>>>>> profile >>>>>>>> data (not as drastic as VC++, but about factor 3). >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Are you doing any memory allocation or input/outputs ? If that's >>>>>>> the case then you should not start the code with F5 but shift F5 from >>>>>>> inside VS. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> hj. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Computer-go mailing list >>>>>>> Computer-go@dvandva.org >>>>>>> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Computer-go mailing list >>>>>> Computer-go@dvandva.org >>>>>> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Computer-go mailing list >>>>> Computer-go@dvandva.org >>>>> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Computer-go mailing list >>>> Computer-go@dvandva.org >>>> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Computer-go mailing list >>> Computer-go@dvandva.org >>> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Computer-go mailing list >> Computer-go@dvandva.org >> http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >> > >
_______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list Computer-go@dvandva.org http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
