In 2013 Intel introduced the Xeon Phi, a new parallel co-processor board. The Xeon Phi is a cache-coherent many-core shared memory architecture claiming CPU-like versatility, programmability, high performance, and power efficiency. The first published micro-benchmark studies indicate that many of Intel's claims appear to be true. The current paper is the first study on the Phi of a complex artificial intelligence application. It contains an open source MCTS application for playing tournament quality Go (an oriental board game). We report the first speedup figures for up to 240 parallel threads on a real machine, allowing a direct comparison to previous simulation studies. After a substantial amount of work, we observed that performance scales well up to 32 threads, largely confirming previous simulation results of this Go program, although the performance surprisingly deteriorates between 32 and 240 threads. Furthermore, we report (1) unexpected performance anomalies between the Xeon Phi and Xeon CPU for small problem sizes and small numbers of threads, and (2) that performance is sensitive to scheduling choices. Achieving good performance on the Xeon Phi for complex programs is not straightforward; it requires a deep understanding of (1) search patterns, (2) of scheduling, and (3) of the architecture and its many cores and caches. In practice, the Xeon Phi is less straightforward to program for than originally envisioned by Intel.
The parallelization of MCTS across multiple-machines has proven surprisingly difficult. The limitations of existing algorithms were evident in the 2009 Computer Olympiad where ZEN using a single fourcore machine defeated both Fuego with ten eight-core machines, and Mogo with twenty thirty-two core machines. This paper investigates the limits of parallel MCTS in order to understand why distributed parallelism has proven so difficult and to pave the way towards future distributed algorithms with better scaling. We first analyze the single-threaded scaling of Fuego and find that there is an upper bound on the play-quality improvements which can come from additional search. We then analyze the scaling of an idealized N-core shared memory machine to determine the maximum amount of parallelism supported by MCTS. We show that parallel speedup depends critically on how much time is given to each player. We use this relationship to predict parallel scaling for time scales beyond what can be empirically evaluated due to the immense computation required. Our results show that MCTS can scale nearly perfectly to at least 64 threads when combined with virtual loss, but without virtual loss scaling is limited to just eight threads. We also find that for competition time controls scaling to thousands of threads is impossible not necessarily due to MCTS not scaling, but because high levels of parallelism can start to bump up against the upper performance bound of FUEGO itself.