Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 01:44:10 08/18/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 17, 2003 at 23:16:19, Uri Blass wrote: >>If you ever do a parallel search, forget about determinism. If you don't, >>forget about winning games. :) > >one cpu has chances not only to win games but also to win tournaments. > >A lot of programs won tournaments inspite of having only one cpu. I think you take his words too literally, of course you can win games even if you enforce determanism. I think SMP is ~50 Elo just sitting there for the taking. You can go elsewhere and find 50 Elo (perhaps) but why bother, why not take 'em where you see 'em? >The king did it in the dutch championship when more than one cpu of some >opponents did not help them Was that the one where it drew against Shredder and lost against Fritz? Perhaps with a dual it could have won the tournament with an even bigger margin :) >Same for Shredder in the past when Ferret,Junior,Fritz had more than one cpu. I'm sure if it had been a longer tournament Shredder would have had some problems against equal opponents on faster hardware. In short tournaments anything can happen of course, perhaps Shredder just had a better opening book? >When computers become faster I expect the advantage of 2 cpus against 1 cpu to >be less important and things like better order of moves may be more important. Maybe, or maybe not. Perhaps duals are just the beginning, quads will one day get cheap too, I hope :) >It is also possible to be deterministic with more than one cpu. >You may lose some speed relative to being not deterministic but still do >significantly better than one cpu. > >Uri If those ~50 Elo shrink to ~20 because of the restictions, then I'd begin to question whether it was worth it. -S.
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.