Author: Chris Carson
Date: 10:34:11 07/08/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 08, 2002 at 13:28:44, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On July 08, 2002 at 13:22:06, Chris Carson wrote: > >>On July 08, 2002 at 12:48:58, Sune Fischer wrote: >> >>>On July 08, 2002 at 11:34:36, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>>I too am a DB fan. Just like Bob. >>>>> >>>>>But I actually agree with you here. I don't think DB did anything >>>>>*spectacular*. >>>> >>>>I totally disagree. Their speed _was_ "spectacular". And that was _the_ >>>>point of Deep Blue, after all. Not the point everyone _wants_ to be the >>>>point of deep blue, but _the point_ the team developed over 10 years... >>>> >>> >>>Here is a crazy thought, why not simulate DB? >>>Given all the papers, I think it should be possible to modify Craft to use the >>>same eval and extensions. We turn off hashing, nullmove, SEE and whatever DB >>>didn't have. Then we find a slow machine for Tiger and a super fast one for >>>Crafty, so Crafty (in DB-mode) has a 200 nps fold advantage. >>> >>>Ok lot of work, but seems this is the never ending story :) >>> >>>-S. >> >>Good idea! see: http://www.rebel.nl/match.htm > > >You do realize that (a) the match was ended after exactly one game? (b) Ed >ran _another_ experiment matching Crafty _and_ rebel at something like two >hours per move? Do you know the result of _that_ match (not a handicap match, >just both programs running long enough to simulate hardware available in say >10 years... Yes, the link above lists an overview, the game and the (b) match. I remember the match, I think we all discussed on rgcc (before this forum) back in 1996/97.
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.