Author: Uri Blass
Date: 16:36:00 01/20/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 20, 2006 at 17:58:42, Dann Corbit wrote:
>On January 20, 2006 at 17:27:10, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On January 20, 2006 at 17:07:09, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>
>>>Consider Deep Shredder or Deep Fritz on a 4 way box with dual core CPUs
>>>8x CPU speed would mean 150 Elo (with some SMP loss).
>>>
>>>That is a system runnable today.
>>>
>>>Now, imagine an 8 way box with 4 cores each (probably next year)
>>>That would be another 100 Elo.
>>>
>>>If we lost one whole doubling from SMP loss, it would still be +200 Elo.
>>>
>>>But I think that on a single CPU, Rybka is probably the strongest.
>>
>>I think that there is a diminishing returns so I am not sure if your estimate is
>>correct.
>
>I allowed for a 50% SMP loss for the +200 Elo estimate.
>I think that even with 32 cores, that should be achievable.
>{16x speedup for 32 cores}
>
>But maybe not.
>
>I did see an experiment where linear speedup was achieved for a large number of
>processors.
>
>In order to accomplish it, the tree was simply expanded and processors were
>given leaf nodes of the expanded tree to work on.
>
>And so, with 20 CPUs at the root position, you would give each CPU one of the 20
>possible first moves to work on. And if you had 400 CPUs, you could expand 2
>levels.
>
>It is also what the chessbrain project does, according to my understanding.
>Of course, they have a huge network latency to overcome, so it is not like SMP
>at all. That is why I did not consider network based solutions for the
>strongest possible chess engine.
Note that I think about diminishing return from being twice faster and not only
about diminishing returns from more processors.
Uri
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.