Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 15:33:41 01/26/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 26, 2000 at 18:12:10, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >On January 26, 2000 at 18:06:45, Tom Kerrigan wrote: > >>No, I assure you that the general-purpose instruction vs. DB instruction >>situation is very clear, regardless of background. If you don't understand it, I >>will be happy to explain it via e-mail, but I don't think it needs to be >>re-hashed here. > >Unfortunately, it's not so clear. But I don't plan on rehashing it here, >either, until I get some more information on it, hopefully from the source. No, it is quite obvious. It takes very little computer expertise to understand, too. Here is a direct quote from the abstract of FHH's IEEE article: "On a general-purpose computer, the computation performed by the chess chip for one chess position is estimated to require up to 40,000 general-purpose instructions." Now we can make the following assumptions: * one hertz = one instruction (good enough) * Bob is correct -> FHH meant 40,000 DB instructions * DB chip searched at least 2M NPS Here is the simple arithmetic based on these assumptions: (2M nodes/sec) * (40k instructions/node) = 80G In other words, the DB chip would have to run at 80 GIGAhertz to search 2M NPS, which the obviously did not do. -Tom
This page took 0.01 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.