Author: James Robertson
Date: 12:22:53 01/06/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 06, 2000 at 10:33:41, Graham Laight wrote: >On January 06, 2000 at 10:18:24, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>>Probably even more important in Bob's case is that he has always wanted to >>>strongly promote the idea that multi-processor computers are massively stronger >>>than (single processor) PCs. It would be a blow to his esteem if it was proven >>>beyond all possible doubt that PCs had attained a GM level of play! >> >>pure nonsense... I believe multiprocessor systems are _better_. And that is >>provable by simple measurements. But it says nothing about how strong the >>things are on one cpu.. only that they are better on 2. > >Not quite pure nonsense. A multi-processor system is better than a single >processor system ONLY if they're both running the same software. > >What I was saying was that, because I believe that Bob has a strong emotional >preference for multi-processor chess systems over single (or small number) >processor chess systems (after all, he was the author of Cray Blitz, and he has >been known to strongly support DB in CCC threads), I believe that he would be >happier if a multi-processor machine became the first undisputed GM. This might >have an impact on his impartiality when judging whether PCs have reached that >standard of play yet. > >-g Perhaps you should ask him if he has strong emotional preferences for multi-processor machines? Maybe he has strong emotional preferences for _speed_ and multi-processor machines will always deliver more. Before you post stuff about other people's *motives* you should make sure that is _actually_ what they are thinking. James
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.