Author: blass uri
Date: 02:23:53 07/28/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 27, 1999 at 22:56:03, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On July 27, 1999 at 02:41:30, blass uri wrote: > >> >>On July 26, 1999 at 19:23:01, John Wentworth wrote: >> >>>In my opinion, Cray Blitz running >>>on a Cray Supercomputer would still blow away any of the current programs >>>running on any PC today. >> >>I want to see games to see if Cray blitz of today is really better than parallel >>crafty of today. >> >>I am interested to see results of games at different time control. >> >>I guess that cray blitz has good chances at blitz but is going to lose at slower >>time control. >> >>Uri > > >It isn't going to lose. Crafty on a quad xeon is doing about 700K nodes >per second. Cray Blitz is doing 7M nodes per second. That is 10X, which is >very hard to overcome. Cray Blitz also has some evaluation things that I can >do with vector hardware cheaply, but which I can't do in normal scalar machines >because of the cost. > >But even if knowledge was equal, 10x is murder, speed-wise. I agree that 10x is a big advantage if the knowledge is equal but you stopped to work on cray-blitz some years ago when you continue to work on crafty. This is the reason that I guessed that the knowledge of crafty may be better than the knowledge of cray-blitz and it has chances at longer time controls. You also had a problem to get time to work on the cray and this may cause cray-blitz more bugs then crafty(another reason that crafty has more chances). I know that cray-blitz did not do impressive results in the last tournaments that it played. I understood that it lost against wchess because of a bug but there may be more bugs that you are not aware to them. 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.