Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Neverending story with incomplete tablebases

Author: Sune Fischer

Date: 02:59:52 08/18/03

Go up one level in this thread


On August 18, 2003 at 05:46:54, Peter Fendrich wrote:

>On August 18, 2003 at 04:44:10, Sune Fischer wrote:
>
>>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?
>
>Well Sune, if it was that easy to just take 'em...
>Starting with SMP complicates your program by a factor x and introduces new
>fresh bugs. That goes for every little improvement and change you are going to
>do. You first have to think about how it affects your SMP logic even if it's
>"foolproof" written with good design. You always have to keep it ín mind and
>your debugging is even harder than before. More complicated and more bug
>intensive = 50 ELO. Hmmm I think I'll wait. If it was >51 I would go for it ...
>:-)
>
>/Peter

That might be true, I don't have much experience with it, but I think it should
be manageable.

Probably the primary argument not to do it, is that not many users have duals,
so from commercial point of view perhaps indeed it is better to spend the time
on something else which will benefit all.

However, for the die hard fan who just wants the strongest kit (HW+SW), dual is
the way to go.

-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.