Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 09:02:17 04/16/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 16, 2001 at 06:44:24, Mogens Larsen wrote: >On April 16, 2001 at 05:33:47, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>What an utter nonsense is that. You and Enrique should know better than that. >>It is like Christophe said, all arranged behind the curtains, no way back. >>Discrimination of the worst kind. >> >>In no way it is proven that a multi-processor program is doing better than >>a single-processor program. Just look at the latest Ausfess tournament Tiger >>13.0 (not 14.0) topping above all the multi-processing entries: > >One argument for requiring that the programs be SMP capable is the publicity >side of the contest. After Deep Blue and top performances by Deep Junior and >Deep Fritz at GM tournaments, Rebel Century on a fast Athlon wouldn't sound very >impressive in that context. > >Whether Rebel Century or the Tigers have any real chance against Deep Fritz on >an eight cpu monster remains to be seen and I honestly doubt it. However, it >would be fair if everyone was given the chance no matter how difficult it would >be. Especially since they've abandoned ship on the rest of the SMP capable >programs you mention as well, which doesn't imply an ambition to resolve the >challenger question in an acceptable fashion IMO. > >>. Junior 4 x 500 Mhz >>. Fritz 4 x 500 Mhz >>. Ferret 4 x 400 Mhz >>. Cilkchess 240 x Alpha at 250 Mhz >>. P.ConNerS 186 x PII 450 Mhz >>. Zugzwang 512 x Alpha at 300 Mhz > >Thanks for mentioning some of the important SMP capable programs. Are there >others? Something called Dark Thought? > >Mogens. Dark Thought? No. Crafty is one of course...
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.