Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:48:30 07/20/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 20, 2000 at 14:37:45, Chris Carson wrote: >On July 20, 2000 at 14:27:43, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On July 20, 2000 at 13:26:34, Chris Carson wrote: >> >>>>On July 20, 2000 at 10:33:34, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>[snip] >>> >>>>>That is an extrapolation based on simple fact. For 10 years, deep thought >>>>>accomplished that at ACM and WCCC events. DB is about 100 times faster than >>>>>Deep Thought. Since deep thought played its last game about 5 years ago, I >>>>>don't think you will find that machines have gotten 100 times faster over the >>>>>past five years. >>> >>>Specint 2000 results: >>> >>>P3-700 = 310 >>>8x P3-700 = 2480 >>> >>>10 years ago: >>> >>>486-33 = 5 (released may of 1990) >>> >>>5 years ago: >>> >>>P-90 = 25 >>> >>>8x-700 is 2480/5= 496 times as fast as the 486-33 of 10 years ago. >>>8x-700 is 2480/25= 99 times as fast as the P90 of 5 years ago. >>> >>>>>The math is pretty simple. >>> >>>Yes, did you actually do the math? >> >>Yes I did. 5 years ago today I was running on a P5/133. The 486 has >>nothing to do with anything. >> >>You take the best PC in 1995, and compute the ratio of speed to the best PC >>at present (1ghz). Then see if _that_ is anywhere near a factor of 100. Hint: >>it isn't close. > >You have no data of chip test, DT, DTII, 96 DB or 97 DB against P-133's >or P6-200. Deep Junior runs on a 8x-700 machine not a 1GHZ single >pocessor. You quote data from 10 years ago, 10 years ago was 386/486. > >The only data you have that is close to what you claim is the 1995 >WCCC and DT (DB prototype) lost to Fritz on a P90. I do not care what >HW you had, there is no data on the P-133 or P6-200 for you to make any >claims. > >I am still waiting for you to admit Ed is right! You are only digging >a Deeper Blue Hole to drown in. :) > >Best Regards, >Chris Carson What on earth are you rambling about? I am not quoting _any_ single result of DT vs a particular clock speed. Let's do this again: please read carefully: from 1988 thru 1995 DT blew everyone away. During that period, it lost two games to microcomputers. Out of a total of 50 computer chess games played at ACM and WCCC events. Follow me so far? So thru 1995 DT _dominated_ computer chess like it has never been dominated before. Point 2: After 1995, two new versions of the hardware were built, the last one being over 100X faster than the DT hardware used in 1995. Follow me so far? So since 1995, DB increased in speed by 100X, over the program that was dominating computer chess prior to and including 1995. Still with me? Now, how much has the speed of the microprocessor increased since the year 1995? I say nowhere near 100x. Still there? So we have a new program, DB2, that is 100x faster than the program that was dominating computer chess in 1995. What has happened in the PC hardware world to close that gap? Still there? DB 1995 to present: speed increase 100X PC 1995 to present: speed increase < 100X IE the gap has _widened_ between DB and the rest of us. It has not _closed_ any... Now if you have trouble following that, then I don't know what else I can say to make it any clearer. DB dominated everyone thru 1995 and has widened the speed differential between it and other programs, as of today. The simple conclusion is that the skill level gap has widened as well... Questions now???
This page took 0.04 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.