Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Deep Junior has proved that Hardware is way Over-rated

Author: walter irvin

Date: 11:18:09 07/20/00

Go up one level in this thread


On July 19, 2000 at 15:43:56, Amir Ban wrote:

>On July 18, 2000 at 18:53:39, Jerry Adams wrote:
>
>>On July 18, 2000 at 18:14:51, Rajen Gupta wrote:
>>
>>>On July 18, 2000 at 13:39:01, Jerry Adams wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> I doubt if DeepBlue with all it's billions of calculations per second could
>>>>score much better than DeepJunior at Dortmund. Seem it is a bad day for the
>>>>Advocates of "Hardware is everything" Theory. Deepblue could probally Easily
>>>>Defeat DeepJr in a Match, but against humans the story is different. I hope
>>>>programmers Continue to Develope Software and not sit back lazily waiting for
>>>>Hardware to do all the work.
>>>
>>>Hi jerry:you obviously have got the gist of your message mixed up:it is
>>>essentially hardware that is powering junior to such great levels; just as it
>>>was the deeper blue 2 with 3-4 times as powerful hardware as db 1 which finally
>>>manged to thrash kasparov.
>>>
>>>you don't really believe that junior 6 on a single pentium 600 with 64 megs of
>>>ram would have gone anywhere do you?
>>>
>>>rajen gupta
>>
>>  Well Actually, Yes I do!! If you look at the Rebel Grandmaster challenge
>>series you will notice that not only Did Rebel Draw 2750 rated annand but it
>>also defeated two very strong grandmasters! The Annand game was on K62-450
>>hardware, the others on k63-600.  I am not sure that We know  exactly How much
>>Programs actually gain from hardware increases when matched against humans. I
>>think it is pretty well established that they gain ,no one knows exactly how
>>well junior6 would have performed on a pent600. I noticed on my pentIII600
>>Junior 6 found a significant amount of the moves from dortmund that Deepjr
>>Played, and this was achieved within Standard tournament time controls. My
>>opinion is that even the most Knowledable Computer Chess Scientist can only
>>guess, when it comes to Elo ratings of computers, how much Hardware means, ect,
>>etc,   I think there are alot of unknowns in computer chess, Which makes it so
>>incredibly interesting.
>
>Strangely enough, there were several times at Dortmund that I wished I played on
>my notebook (Celeron 400) and not on the Primergy server. At times, it appeared
>to think too much.
>
>Examples: Against Piket, Junior picks 9.Bh6 immediately, and everyone around
>with a notebook saw that. It takes 8 processors and tournament time controls for
>it to play the smart-aleck 9.Bg5.
>
>In the same game, when 31.Qd1 was played, every Junior notebook was showing f4,
>and of course the right thing psychologically is to play f4 and hope for the
>best.
>
>Against Khalifman, 19.Qd4 appeared at extreme depth, when until then 19.Qc4 was
>steadily counted as best. In retrospect, obviously Qc4 is better (it avoids the
>queen exchange, and there's the threat of c3 (or a3) too).
>
>The big hardware had its merits of course, and I'm sure the balance is positive.
>But it's a two-edged sword, and it may all boil down to luck.
>
>Amir

i have some new ideas for junior , that will be a mini break thru . email if you
are interested ??



This page took 0 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.