Author: Miguel A. Ballicora
Date: 12:14:07 04/12/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 12, 2002 at 14:06:54, Tanya Deborah wrote: >On April 12, 2002 at 11:50:03, David Dory wrote: > >>On April 12, 2002 at 03:51:14, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>How can you know it when the thing never played on equal hardware against other >>>programs? >>> >>>I believe that the algorithms of it were not world class and it was better than >>>computers of that time thanks to better hardware inspite of inferior software. >> >>Uri, you're a chuckle! >> >>Hsu and team had ALREADY MADE A WORLD CHAMP - DEEP THOUGHT. Then they re-did it >>with TWO more revisions, DB and Deeper Blue. Increasing it's hardware, which as >>has been mentioned, is the biggest factor in chess computer improvement in the >>past 20 years. (Try running Fritz on a real clunker CPU/system for a hoot!) >> >>Then they increased it's software side with lots of GM input. >> >>But because of a move here, a move there, (and HSU has stated that DB had a bug >>causing it to not always select the best move it found), some guys decide: >> >>** That's not good! ** >> >>When you read what Hsu wrote, you know right off - the guys a total bright bulb, >>and he was totally into computer chess. Oh, and his team had several other >>Ph.D's with lots of experience, also working on DB. Lots of backing from IBM. >> >>If a bunch of Ph.D's and/or World chess champions programmers (who had nothing >>to gain from saying it, monetarily), were saying "DB is not as good as Fritz on >>a good PC", I'd consider that. >> >>But when I hear people who can NOT program a top chess player, go on and on >>about "this move" or "that move" of DB being bad, well that just doesn't cut it >>with me. Every program plays questionable moves now and then. We've seen >>thousands of them in CCC/rgcc over the years. They're useless for any kind of >>meaningful comparison of strength, and you know that better than most, I'm quite >>sure! >> >>I'm not concerned about DB never playing Fritz on equal hardware. If you could >>somehow compare just the software, because of the on-going work on Fritz, it >>might be stronger than DB. But that's my point - you can't. Deep Blue was >>hardware just as much as software, and that's why Deeper Blue still would be >>world champ today if it was playing. >> >>Some day, a program (and system) will be stronger than DB, but that's not >>happened yet. >> > Actually, programs are better than DB, if they run in a fast computer(up to >1ghz) . You can compare them it in the same way that Kramnik did it. Fritz >really choose _better_ moves than DB made.. How you can explain this??? The >hardware was not enought for DB???? > > Fritz 7 is a great program, and in 5 years, programmers made a very good work. > > Deep Blue was a very stupid program and i really do not believe that DP search >200 M. "Would you believe that it beat Kasparov at regular time control?" Maxwell Smart, Agent 86 >If Deep Blue run in a PC, I believe that it will be _weak_ in compare with the >first programs in SSDF list. If Michael Schumacher ride a bicycle rather than a Ferrari, Lance Armstrong will beat him. Moreover, take the bicycles out and I bet for Maurice Greene. Would you even lend a Ferrari to Maurice Greene? Miguel
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.