Author: Uri Blass
Date: 13:49:29 11/06/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 06, 2000 at 16:43:45, Uri Blass wrote: >On November 06, 2000 at 16:21:54, Christophe Theron wrote: > >>On November 06, 2000 at 16:13:43, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On November 06, 2000 at 15:17:32, Jonathan Lee wrote: >>> >>>>On November 06, 2000 at 01:43:48, Christophe Theron wrote: >>>> >>>>>On November 05, 2000 at 15:33:57, Jonathan Lee wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>I understand Walter Irvin's point of view of contemporary greats versus >>>>>>the others point of view who are talking about influential greats. >>>>>>It would be safe to say that the 20th century influential greats (such as >>>>>>Richard Lang) are a SUBSET of the year 2000 contemporary greats listed _some_ by >>>>>>Walter Irvin. >>>>>>Grandmasters in gigahertz: Just tell me how many gigahertz will it take to >>>>>>equal Kramnik. >>>>>>Jonathan (83rd message) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>500MHz will be enough. Not with current programs, but in several years software >>>>>improvements will compensate. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Christophe >>>>500 GHZ >>>>Jonathan (86th message) >>> >>>I am not christophe but I am almost sure that he means 500 mhz and not 500GHZ. >>>I suspect that 500GHZ may be enough with the best programs of today. >>> >>>Uri >> >> >>I meant 500MHz. >> >>500GHz is enough with programs of ten years ago. > >I disgree here. > >I do not think that 500GHz with programs of 1990 is enough. > >I believe that 500GHz with programs of 1990 are going to lose at tournament time >control against the top programs of today on 1 GHz. > >Uri I can add that it is possible to check it by a correspondence match when a program of 1990 will have 25 hours per move and a program of 2000 will have 3 minutes per move when both programs use 1 GHz processors. Uri
This page took 0.01 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.