Author: James T. Walker
Date: 14:32:08 04/20/00
Go up one level in this thread
On April 20, 2000 at 09:09:18, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On April 20, 2000 at 01:39:55, Jason Williamson wrote: > >>On April 19, 2000 at 23:55:06, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On April 19, 2000 at 23:53:31, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>As I had mentioned a while back, I have a sack full of quad xeon 550 machines >>>>in a beowulf cluster. While waiting on a few final pieces to arrive, I decided >>>>to do what I thought was an interesting test: >>>> >>>>two identical machines, and I mean _identical_. Quad xeon 550's, 27 gigs of >>>>SCSI disks in a raid-0 (striping) configuration, 512mb of ram, etc. IE >>>>everything is identical, with all the 3-4-5 piece compressed tablebases, >>>>same opening books, etc. >>>> >>>>The only difference was that 'crafty' plays computers and humans, while scrappy >>>>only plays humans. Several of us had postulated over the years that if you only >>>>play humans, you can drive your rating through the roof. Using the same >>>>formulas (5 3 blitz or faster, 60 60 standard or faster, or most any bullet) >>>>I have been watching the two programs for a month now. And they seem to >>>>hover at the point scrappy == crafty+100, roughly. Standard has crafty >>>>actually higher, but that is because crafty is playing standard against >>>>computers, while scrappy is playing very little standard as humans seem to be >>>>avoiding that for the most part... and those that do play standard play crafty >>>>as it is better known. >>>> >>>>100 points was a surprise... as I thought it would be more. At present crafty >>>>is at 31126 and scrappy is at 3219 blitz (which is the most stable ratings >>> >>>argh: ^^^^^ >>> >>> >>>3126 of course... >>> >>>31126 won't be reached for maybe 10-20 more years. :) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>since >>>>most games are blitz). >>>> >>>>It seems that not playing computers is _not_ a way to grossly inflate your >>>>rating, unless you consider 100 as inflated. Note that a rating of 3200 is >>>>very high, considering that there are not a lot of GM players that are rated >>>>even 3000. I watched scrappy play a 16 game match earlier this week, it won >>>>8 games, lost one, then one 7 more, for a 15-1 result (5 3 blitz). It lost 32 >>>>rating points for the effort. :) >>>> >>>>I am going to continue the experiment until I get the rest of the beowulf >>>>hardware (another quad box and a fast ethernet switch to complement the >>>>giganet switch). If you watch the ratings, you will get a feel for the >>>>difference in playing only humans and humans + computers... >> >> >>What do you figure your rating gain will be with the beuwolf beast? > > >Difficult to say right now. I am running on a quad xeon. I will be able to >use 9 machines (total) although really only 8 of them have the giganet inter- >connect. 8 times the horsepower ought to give a search at _least_ a factor >of 4 faster, which is conservative I hope. that would be the equivalent of >doubling the speed 2 times. I would think at least 100 rating points, maybe >more, but mainly at standard time controls, as distributed computing is not >going to be great for blitz/bullet... Hello Bob, That's too bad! I was looking forward to seeing that thing take over the world at blitz! Anyway it will be interesting to watch. Can you give me a couple of clues as to why the blitz will not work so good? In laymans terms of course. Regards, Jim Walker
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.