Update 240116: Update tours for: SFDNNv6_240114_modern.exe, SFDNNv6_240114_avx2.exe, and SFDNNv6_240114_armv8 uploaded. Note that the armv8 build is not manually compiled thus not very fast. On Archimedes' page faster SFDNNv6_240114 builds are now available, see links below.
Links to Archimedes' SFDNNv6_240114 downloads:
SFDNNv6_240114 for Android (OEX)
SFDNNv6_240114 for Android (zip)
Two Windows update tours: Old SFDNNv6 vs New SFDNNv6
-------------------------------------------------------------------
TC 2.5+0.025s
Score of SFDNNv6_240102 vs SFDNNv6_240114: 116 - 145 - 239 [] 500
Elo difference: -20.17 +/- 22.00, LOS: 3.63 %, DrawRatio: 47.80 %
Ptnml: WW WD DD/WL LD LL
Distr: 5 60 100 71 14
-------------------------------------------------------------------
TC15+0.15s
Score of SFDNNv6_240102 vs SFDNNv6_240114: 626 - 718 - 1656 [] 3000
Elo difference: -10.66 +/- 8.31, LOS: 0.60 %, DrawRatio: 55.20 %
Ptnml: WW WD DD/WL LD LL
Distr: 11 320 753 398 18
-------------------------------------------------------------------
In the next update SFDNNv6 will slightly change its name to SFNNv6, since D=Dual is mainstream now, as predicted somewhere down below. So the future engine name and its main net generation name will be identical: SFNNv6.
Windows TC=90+0.9s tour NewSFDNNv6 vs OldSFDNNv6 vs Raid v2.76i
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rank Name Elo +/- Games Points Score Draw TC
1 SFDNNv6_240102 22 25 300 159.5 53.2% 58.3% 90+0.9
2 SFDNNv6_231231 7 25 300 153.0 51.0% 58.0% 90+0.9
3 Raid v2.76i_X_sse41 -29 26 300 137.5 45.8% 57.0% 90+0.9
450 of 3600 games finished.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note that SFDNNv6 is primarily made for Android but it is obviously also pretty strong on Windows😲! Additionally note that the last update of SFDNNv6 worked fine.
Details about the tournament soft- and hardware have been already described elsewhere in the release section ("Battle of the clones"):
https://github.com/Joachim26/StockfishNPS/releases/tag/Master_DroidSFnps-bb4c63b3
All tour data (games, configs,...) will be uploaded when tour is finished.
SFDNnps231206 for Android
with the SFNNv8 (big) EvalFile
nn-0000000000a0.nnue
and the L1-256 (small) EvalFile
ecb35f70ff2a.nnue
SFDNnps231206NNv6 for Android
with the last SFNNv6 (big) EvalFile
nn-a3d1bfca1672.nnue
and the L1-256 (small) EvalFile
ecb35f70ff2a.nnue
SFDNnps231214 for Android and
SFDNnps231215_modern.exe (the small EvalFile has to be in the engine folder)
with the SFNNv8 (big) EvalFile
nn-0000000000a0.nnue
and the L1-128 (small) EvalFile
nn-c01dc0ffeede.nnue
SFDNnps231214NNv6 for Android
with the last SFNNv6 (big) EvalFile
nn-a3d1bfca1672.nnue
and the L1-128 (small) EvalFile
nn-c01dc0ffeede.nnue
All following Android tournaments were played on a Xiaomi Poco M3 (Android 12, Snapdragon 662, 4(+2) GB RAM) using Termux and FastChess for Android. Concurrency is set to 4 and 1 thread per engine is used. Opening suite used is UHO_2022_8mvs_+110_+119.epd. Note that such kind of openings enlarge ELO differences but reduced draw rates significantly.
------------------------------------------------------------------
TC: 1+0.01s
Score of SFDNnps231206NNv6 vs SFDNnps231206: 501 - 213 - 286 [] 1000
Elo difference: 102.97 +/- 18.65, LOS: 100.00 %, DrawRatio: 28.60 %
Ptnml: WW WD DD/WL LD LL
Distr: 118 146 161 56 19
------------------------------------------------------------------
TC: 2.5+0.025s
Score of SFDNnps231206NNv6 vs SFDNnps231206: 275 - 96 - 229 [] 600
Elo difference: 106.90 +/- 22.21, LOS: 100.00 %, DrawRatio: 38.17 %
Ptnml: WW WD DD/WL LD LL
Distr: 49 119 100 26 6
------------------------------------------------------------------
TC: 5+0.05s
Score of SFDNnps231206NNv6 vs SFDNnps231206: 259 - 112 - 229 [] 600
Elo difference: 86.89 +/- 22.10, LOS: 100.00 %, DrawRatio: 38.17 %
Ptnml: WW WD DD/WL LD LL
Distr: 44 108 104 39 5
------------------------------------------------------------------
TC: 10+0.1s
Score of SFDNnps231206NNv6 vs SFDNnps231206: 149 - 71 - 180 [] 400
Elo difference: 68.63 +/- 25.34, LOS: 100.00 %, DrawRatio: 45.00 %
Ptnml: WW WD DD/WL LD LL
Distr: 20 80 64 30 6
------------------------------------------------------------------
TC: 30+0.3s
Score of SFDNnps231206NNv6 vs SFDNnps231206: 66 - 40 - 94 [] 200
Elo difference: 45.42 +/- 35.16, LOS: 99.42 %, DrawRatio: 47.00 %
Ptnml: WW WD DD/WL LD LL
Distr: 3 35 48 13 1
------------------------------------------------------------------
TC: 35+0.35s
Score of SFDNnps231206NNv6 vs SFDNnps231206: 112 - 66 - 222 [] 400
Elo difference: 40.13 +/- 22.67, LOS: 99.97 %, DrawRatio: 55.50 %
Ptnml: WW WD DD/WL LD LL
Distr: 6 70 90 32 2
------------------------------------------------------------------
TC: 45+0.45s concurrency=6
Score of SFDNnps231206NNv6 vs SFDNnps231206: 93 - 55 - 152 [] 300
Elo difference: 44.25 +/- 27.63, LOS: 99.91 %, DrawRatio: 50.67 %
Ptnml: WW WD DD/WL LD LL
Distr: 5 56 64 22 3
------------------------------------------------------------------
TC: 50+0.5s concurrency=6
Score of SFDNnps231206NNv6 vs SFDNnps231206: 95 - 49 - 156 [] 300
Elo difference: 53.70 +/- 27.22, LOS: 99.99 %, DrawRatio: 52.00 %
Ptnml: WW WD DD/WL LD LL
Distr: 4 60 65 20 1
--------------------------------------------------
TC: 60+0.6s
Score of SFDNnps231206NNv6 vs SFDNnps231206: 54 - 42 - 104 [] 200
Elo difference: 20.87 +/- 33.41, LOS: 88.97 %, DrawRatio: 52.00 %
Ptnml: WW WD DD/WL LD LL
Distr: 0 31 51 17 1
------------------------------------------------------------------
TC: 180+1s
Score of SFDNnps231206NNv6 vs SFDNnps231206: 36 - 29 - 93 [] 158
Elo difference: 15.40 +/- 34.80, LOS: 80.74 %, DrawRatio: 58.86 %
Ptnml: WW WD DD/WL LD LL
Distr: 0 20 46 13 0
------------------------------------------------------------------
Convincing victories of SFDNnps with the smaller SFNNv6 main net. So far one should say, since nobody knows what would be the result at VVVLTCs. However, longer TCs than TC=180+1s will not be played since Termux tends to crash at such long TCs. A planned tour of 10 hours duration and Termux crashes after 6 or 9 hours and all data files are lost... no😊.
Although the error bars look quite large the resulting curve looks quite smooth. Except the two points determined with concurrency=6. However, since under these conditions less nodes per time interval are calculated (4 p-cores + 2 e-cores have on average per core less performance than 4 p-cores even without thermal throttling which in addition reduces the average nps) the two points are shifted somewhat to the left and then fit better to the other points.
BTW, the reason for the superiority of SFnpsNNv6 is, certainly, an about 50% higher nps-value (stored in the fcXX.pgn files for each move). Such high values are, at least on my phone, not much below nps-values of other strong Android engines like SFplusNPS, SFMnps, or SFMXnps, all three with the last SFNNv5 net. It is obvious, that tournaments between SFNNv5- and SFNNv6-engines should be made in future. Note that the nps difference between SFNNv5 and SFNNv6/8 engines will decrease when mean nps of the latter engines increases (e.g. due to smaller and faster small nets). This can already be observed for the 231224 update. I am sure that dual nets have high potential and will find their way into SF master, but this will take some time since several details of the upcoming patch are still under discussion.
Net-selection and nps-enhancement
SFnps16 uses the same net version SFNNv6 as SFDNnps231214v6 but the mate is not found after about 6 min:
SFDNnps231214v6 has found a mate after 17 s. The reason is the much higher nps, more than 3 times the nps of SFnps16. After 3 moves of the c-pawn the promotion to queen and the following moves result in very unbalanced positions and these positions are calculated, when called by the search function, with the small net or even with simple eval, which is both much faster than the calculation with the big net. Therefore the more than 3 times higher nps value:
When the mate m30 is found the nps has reached an even higher value of 2636 nps:
The next two pictures show (now multiPV=4 changed to 1) that it is actually a mate in m15 and SFDN231214v6 needs about 18.5 s to find it. And SFnps16? I waited 5 min and no mate was shown (multiPV=1):
The long list of many manually compiled SFnps versions/dev-builds (including also the two opponents) still exists, btw 😁.