Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 12:22:10 02/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 15, 2004 at 15:20:01, Slater Wold wrote: >On February 15, 2004 at 15:17:28, Bob Durrett wrote: > >>On February 15, 2004 at 15:14:16, Slater Wold wrote: >> >>>On February 15, 2004 at 15:09:57, Bob Durrett wrote: >>> >>>>On February 15, 2004 at 15:06:26, Slater Wold wrote: >>>> >>>>>On February 15, 2004 at 14:34:08, Bob Durrett wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>I envision a standard equipment rack with 32 or 64 Hydra cards, a power supply, >>>>>>possibly a conventional computer for orchestration, and fans. >>>>> >>>>>Do you think Hydra was running on a single computer, with a single card? >>>> >>>>Actually, that is what I thought. What was actually done? >>> >>>4 Dual Xeon 2.4Ghz PCs & 8 FPGA cards (2 per PC) >>> >>>The PCs are probably $5k a piece. The cards, about $500 a piece. >>> >>>$25k worth of hardware, just to draw Shredder 8 ($50 program) on a PC. >> >>You forgot to add in the cost of the computer Shredder was running on. > >I said 'on a PC'!! > >>>Still think Hydra is the 'engine of the future'? :) >> >>Well, the idea that four Hydra cards were used is encouraging because that >>suggests that using multiple Hydra cards is a workable idea. I do not >>understand, however, why two separate PCs were required. Any ideas about that? > >They used 4 seperate PCs. 2 cards, per PC. > >I am sure it has something to do with PCI bus saturation. Now you're "going technical" on me! : ) Bob D. > >>Bob D. >> >>> >>>>> >>>>>If so, you're wrong. >>>>> >>>>>>Feasible? >>>>> >>>>>Sure. Been done before. Google for 'Deep Blue'. >>>>> >>>>>>If so, what performance could be expected? >>>>> >>>>>'Diminishing returns' comes to mind... >>>>> >>>>>>Note that it might not be necessary to combine the Hydras in the most efficient >>>>>>way possible. Maybe not SMA. >>>>>> >>>>>>Bob D.
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.