Author: Peter Berger
Date: 14:36:10 07/14/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 14, 2004 at 17:14:30, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >On July 14, 2004 at 17:07:37, Peter Berger wrote: > >>On July 14, 2004 at 16:53:39, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >> >>> and had Falcon had the 4x hardware it would have found the correct draw >>>(and with that hardware advantage probably also found a correct winning line). >>>Right? >> >>That's speculation when it is about the win. > >But no speculation as to the draw on equal hardware (whether both ran on 4x or >1x). Yes, that's a logical conclusion from the discussion, assuming you get at least a speedup of 2-3 times on the Quad Opteron. >>Btw, you play with this 4x number very carelessly IMHO. *For Crafty* a Quad >>Opteron is indeed about four times faster than an overclocked AMD2.5GHz 32 bit >>system, but that's the result of programming effort. While Shredder seemed to >>get a very decent speedup, the same was not necessarily true for Fritz and >>Junior, judging by NPS, although I of course can only compair with commercial >>versions - Frans Morsch at least seemed to be impressed by Crafty's speedup. >> >>You probably will have quite some work to do to reach similar speedups as Crafty >>once you get your hands on a Quad Opteron :) > >I say "at least 4x", because each of those Opteron processors was faster than my >2.0GHz AMD 64. In fact I think it was quite more than 4x... My point was that it is not yet evident to me if you will get a 4x speedup with your current (?) parallel version of Falcon compaired to it running on a 2.0 GHz AMD 64. Only you can know the answer to that question, but I am sceptical, as you definitely sound as if you never tried it. You can only compair the same thing on different hardware in a meaningful way. For Crafty I agree that 4* speedup is a lower bound, though 5* is *most* probably already an upper one. >>>>And Ra8 is probably not about search at all. >> >>Have you tried this one too ? > >No, but that was not the losing move (even though it was clearly a bad move). >Ra5 lost the game, when a draw could have been easily achieved by threefold >repetition. I didn't have the time yet to do a detailed analysis of the game either, but I suspect this move threw away a win. Peter
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.