Author: Eugene Nalimov
Date: 11:14:56 07/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On July 15, 2004 at 13:29:25, Uri Blass wrote: >On July 15, 2004 at 13:00:07, Eugene Nalimov wrote: > >>On July 15, 2004 at 12:24:37, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On July 15, 2004 at 12:16:53, Eugene Nalimov wrote: >>> >>>>On July 15, 2004 at 05:11:21, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>On July 14, 2004 at 22:05:25, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On July 14, 2004 at 14:40:17, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On July 14, 2004 at 14:17:33, Matthew Hull wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On July 14, 2004 at 13:00:15, Omid David Tabibi wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>The goal is the best computer chess. You can't have that unless it's open >>>>>>>>>>hardware. It has always been open hardware, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>You forget WMCCC. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>No I don't. This is not WMCCC. It's WCCC. The best chess will be played on >>>>>>>>big hardware. That's why it's open hardware. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>If you want to argue for inferior chess, then go organize thw World Inferior >>>>>>>>Computer Chess Championship. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Meanwhile, the rest of us want to see the best computer chess the world has to >>>>>>>>offer. We want to see the envelope pushed as far as it can go. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>The best computer chess in the world is supposed to be seen at the World >>>>>>>>Championship. You can't do that by limiting hardware. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>I don't know how many different ways it needs to be said. Your idea is fine >>>>>>>>for some other event that is not the WCCC. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I did not suggest to abolish the open hardware format to begin with. What I >>>>>>>suggest is to hold two events, WCCC for open hardware, and WMCCC for uniform >>>>>>>hardware. Just the way it used to be. In WCCC you will find the best >>>>>>>engine+hardware combination, and in WMCCC you will find the strongest chess >>>>>>>program. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Absolutely and totally bogus statement. >>>>>> >>>>>>What processor will you pick? I want 64 bits. Others want 32 bits. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>The best solution is to give the participants the possibility to choose the >>>>>hardware when the participants do not need to care to bring the hardware that >>>>>they choose and the organizers do it for them. >>>>> >>>>>If we talk about WMCCC then a better alternative than uniform hardware is that >>>>>programmers will be able to ask the organizers to give them every machine that >>>>>they ask(behind some price) with only one codition that the machine does not >>>>>have more than one cpu. >>>> >>>>Programmer A spent several months to implement parallel search in his program. >>>> >>>>Programmer B spent those months to rewrite his uni-proc search into assembly >>>>language. >>>> >>>>You suggested rule favors programmer B. Why? >>> >>>A can participates in WCCC when B participates in WMCCC >>> >>>I did not say not to have WCCC >> >>Programmer A asked (and got) from the organizers acess to 1-CPU Power5 system >>that costs $20k. > >I think that WMCCC should not be for expensive hardware so I think A should not >get it >and there should be some limitation about the price of the computer that the >organizers give. > >> >>Programmer B asked dual Opteron system that costs less than $3k. Should he get >>it? Chances that average chess program user will get dual Opteron system are >>much higher than chances that she will get Power5 system. > >I suggest that B should get it only for WCCC and not for WMCCC. >> >>Programmer C asked for new Pentium 5 (or Pentium 6, or ...) system that have >>*efficient* implementation of multithreading. I.e *one* CPU can run 2 threads >>simultaneously, with effective speedup (say) 1.8x. Should he get it? Cost of >>system is $2.5k. > >I think no. > >All the idea of one cpu for WMCCC is to not to test parallel code that is tested >in WCCC. > >> >>Programmer D asked for new AMD K9 (or K10, or ...) system that have dual cores >>*on chip*. I.e *one* physical chip contains 2 CPU cores, with effective speedup >>(say) 1.95x. Should he get it? Cost of system is $1.8k. > >Again no. > >> >>Programmer E asked for new Itanium4 system that have 8 cores *on chip*. >>Effective speedup is (say) 7.5x. Should he get it? Cost of system is $20k, >>exactly as cost of Power5 system we gave to programmer A. > >Again too expensive so no. > >> >>Programmer F asked for off-the-shelf CPU with built-in FPGA (right now there are >>such CPUs for embedded systems). He can use FPGA to dramatically speed his >>search. Cost of system with such CPU is $300 (CPU/memory/serial port, all the >>interface is running on plain PC). Can he use it? > >Allowed for WCCC but if this is not machine that other can buy(if the FPGA is >some special hardware that the programmer designed) then the answer is no. >> >>Programmer G brought with him FPGA or ASIC system designed by him. Total cost of >>all components is $1.5k. Can he use it? BTW, his hardware can do 16 independent >>searches in parallel, but there is exactly one CPU in his system. > >No >Again WMCCC is only software competition and you should use some standard >hardware that people can buy. >> >>Programmer H asked some time on $100k S/3090. His program can use only one CPU, >>and single-CPU performance of S/3090 is 2x less than Opteron 2GHz. To partially >>compensate for this his program is written in the S/3090 assembly language, so >>it cannot be ported anywhere. He points that he don't get *any* hardware >>advantage from running on sych a system compared to *any* WMCCC participant, so >>he should be entered into WMCCC. > >Again no > >WMCCC is not about expensive solutions. >> >>Programmer J wrote his program for the $40 "Gameboy Portable" with z80 CPU. >>There are good chances that when he will not get 1st place he would say >>"competition was not fair -- they have hardware advantage". Should he be >>allowed? > >Yes and congratulation for J for winning the tournament because J was the only >participant after the other programmers that you suggested were not allowed to >enter with the hardware that they wanted so they decided not to play:-( > >Uri Ok. Now let's assume that *all* the hardware is less than $5k. What now? And what to do if sponsor's CPUs are CMP/CMT, as majority of CPUs will be in 2-3 years? Thanks, Eugene
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.