Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:08:24 08/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 21, 2002 at 11:43:03, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 21, 2002 at 11:30:02, chris larson wrote: > >>I thought the last IBM setup that Kasparov played (and lost to) was called >>"deeper blue". Now everyone seems to be referring to it as just "Deep Blue". Is >>it not true that deeper blue could assess approx 1 billions n/s compared to the >>predecessor deep blue's rate of about 200,000 n/s? > >I remember that I read that deeper blue could search twice the number of nodes >than deep blue. > >Deeper blue is the program that beated kasparov in 1997 when deep blue lost >against him in 1996. >Even deep thought searched more than 200,000 nodes/seconds when the numbers that >I heard during the match of 1997 was 200M nodes per second. > >I do not know if the numbers were correct and IBM had a reason to give bigger >numbers than the real numbers as a psychological war against kasparov. > >I do not say that they did it but only that I do not know. > >Uri There were 3 differences between DB1 and DB2. 1. DB2 used a faster SP2 processor from IBM. 2. DB2 had a new chess chip for 1997, the 1996 chips were scrapped. 3. DB2 had twice as many chess processors in 1997 as it did in 1996, which is where the marketing claims of "2x faster" came from... (1997 used 480 chess processors).
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.