Olivier Teytaud wrote:
Hi,
I have got a lockless hash table to work, and I thought I'd share the
results.
[...]
Great! For networks of 4-cores, it is not very useful,
but for highly smp machines it could be great - with your
grid5000 account, you might run crazystone on a
16-core machine and have a very impressive crazyStone.
Olivier
Thanks for the tip. Here are the results on 9x9:
cores playouts/s
1 18,025
2 33,749
3 48,165
4 62,268
5 75,539
6 87,136
7 100,840
8 115,862
10 134,185
12 158,491
14 174,274
16 205,379 (speedup = 11.4)
and on 19x19:
1 3,780
2 7,427
3 11,009
4 13,905
5 17,684
6 21,265
7 24,418
8 27,907
10 34,710
12 40,975
14 48,000
16 54,193 (speedup = 14.3)
Hardware is 8x Dual Core AMD Opteron 875, 2.2 GHz
I'll run tests to try to figure out how much strength is lost by
parallelization (ie, what is the winning rate of 10,000 sequential
playouts vs 1,000 playouts over 10 processors). Hideki ran similar tests
against GNU Go, and found 25 Elo loss with 4 CPUs. So 54,193 playouts
per second over 16 CPUs will certainly not perform as well as 54,193
sequential playouts.
Rémi
_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
