Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 18:48:58 08/18/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 17, 2003 at 12:54:52, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >On August 17, 2003 at 11:36:13, Peter Stayne wrote: > >>I think it's constructive to look at who's got more resources behind the >>development of the hardware in question: Intel or AMD vs. FPGA board makers. >>Intel and AMD have FAR more resources at hand to keep their chips running far >>faster at running chess software than a specialty board could run its hardware >>version. >> >>Brutus is an interesting approach, but it's performance will lag compared with >>the top software engines. >> >>>Sorry, Uri, but that sounds too much like wishful thinking to me. : ) >>>The handwriting is on the wall!!! It is not the current performance that >>>matters, but is the potential or promise of this new approach which should get >>>our attention and debate, IMHO. >>> >>>Bob D. >>>>Uri > >Yes, except that AMD and Intel couldn't care less about how fast their chips run >chess software: they want their chips to be fast at server applications and >multimedia. Oh, they care: a subset of crafty is part of the industry-standard SPECint benchmark. Dave
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.