Author: ShaktiFire
Date: 16:44:54 05/22/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 22, 2000 at 19:34:01, ShaktiFire wrote: >On May 22, 2000 at 16:05:14, James Robertson wrote: > >>On May 22, 2000 at 11:50:35, ShaktiFire wrote: >> >>>On May 22, 2000 at 06:18:47, blass uri wrote: >>> >>>>On May 22, 2000 at 06:11:59, blass uri wrote: >>>> >>>>>On May 22, 2000 at 04:31:58, Jouni Uski wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On May 22, 2000 at 03:34:28, blass uri wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On May 22, 2000 at 01:38:12, Jouni Uski wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On May 22, 2000 at 01:27:53, blass uri wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>They do not indicate it because you do not know what is the rating improvement >>>>>>>>>from 4 processors relative to single 450Mhz. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>But I know, it's at least 100 points as comp-comp games have indicated! >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Jouni >>>>>>> >>>>>>>You cannot know because the difference in comp-comp games does not have to be >>>>>>>the same as comp-human games and I am also not sure that the difference in >>>>>>>comp-comp games is 100 points because the ssdf did not test the new hardware. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>We can know the difference between p200 and K6-450 but we cannot know the >>>>>>>difference between k6-450 and better hardware because it is possible that there >>>>>>>is diminishing returns from hardware. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>Hasn't Heinz new book conclusion: there is no proof about diminishing returns >>>>>>so far... >>>>>> >>>>>>Jouni >>>>> >>>>>There is no proof so we do not know if there is diminishing return or there is >>>>>not. >>>>> >>>>>Uri >>>> >>>>The only way to prove that there is not diminishing return is by games and there >>>>are not many comp-comp games at tournament time control to compare. >>>> >>>>We know that there is no significant diminishing return when you upgrade from >>>>p200 to K6-450 but we do not know what happens when we upgrade from K6-450 to >>>>better hardware. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>The evidence is there in the ratings. At one time, SSDF correlated with >>>human-computer games. Now the SSDF rating is much higher than actual human- >>>computer >>>results. This indicates..... against humans, there is a diminishing return with >>>increase in computer speed. >> >>Not necessarily; it is quite possible that the returns are not diminishing, but >>just that they are smaller at all speed increases. >> >>James > >Thank you , James. Perhaps I will understand your subtleties in several >reincarnations... or perhaps if I had more subtle genes...or a few of those >infamous German lagers... but still a great joy to discuss even our small >hobby domain of computer chess :-) Ok, maybe if the humans are improving and learning anti-computer skills... I think this is possible... maybe we humans can hold out for several more years.... :-) >> >> In computer - computer ratings, the ratings are >>>still increasing linearly with ply. Its hard to plot this out, with different >>>software versions, but the trend from p90 to p 200 to k6-450 is there... >>>basically linear ratings increase with ply increase. This might change later, >>>since I believe the actual curve, ratings vs ply in computer vs. computer, is >>>piecewise linear, and gradually decreasing, but not decreasing as quickly as >>>in comp vs human play.
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.