[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Bug-gnubg] Bug in sigmoid?

From: Joern Thyssen
Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Bug in sigmoid?
Date: Sun, 4 May 2003 20:57:03 +0000
User-agent: Mutt/1.4i

On Sat, Apr 19, 2003 at 04:23:25PM +0200, Olivier Baur wrote
> Le vendredi, 18 avr 2003, à 23:01 Europe/Paris, Joseph Heled a écrit :
> >Third, I need to see numbers on how faster this is on non scalar, 
> >regular x86 machine.
> I don't know if this is a typo, but please note a "scalar" processor is 
> what you call a "regular" processor; on the other hand, "non-scalar" 
> and "super-scalar" refer to vector-computing.
> Please note the speed increase I have measured in sigmoid2 (+60%) was 
> for a regular scalar (ie *non* vector) implementation (on a PPC G4 
> processor); with a vector implementation of sigmoid2 (on the same 
> processor), I actually got a whopping +250% speed increase...
> So let me know what figures you get on a scalar x86 :-)

I tried your code:

I pasted it into neuralnet.c, made a call to ComputeSigTable and
replaced all calls to sigmoid with sigmoid2.

I analysed a 172 move match on 2-ply. It took 475 seconds with the old
code and 463 seconds with the new code.

In your posted code you use 201 points, but I tried with both 201 and
1001 points.

I also got slightly different results with typical differences in the
third or fourth digit.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]