Author: Amir Ban
Date: 12:43:56 07/19/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 18, 2000 at 18:53:39, Jerry Adams wrote: >On July 18, 2000 at 18:14:51, Rajen Gupta wrote: > >>On July 18, 2000 at 13:39:01, Jerry Adams wrote: >> >>> >>> I doubt if DeepBlue with all it's billions of calculations per second could >>>score much better than DeepJunior at Dortmund. Seem it is a bad day for the >>>Advocates of "Hardware is everything" Theory. Deepblue could probally Easily >>>Defeat DeepJr in a Match, but against humans the story is different. I hope >>>programmers Continue to Develope Software and not sit back lazily waiting for >>>Hardware to do all the work. >> >>Hi jerry:you obviously have got the gist of your message mixed up:it is >>essentially hardware that is powering junior to such great levels; just as it >>was the deeper blue 2 with 3-4 times as powerful hardware as db 1 which finally >>manged to thrash kasparov. >> >>you don't really believe that junior 6 on a single pentium 600 with 64 megs of >>ram would have gone anywhere do you? >> >>rajen gupta > > Well Actually, Yes I do!! If you look at the Rebel Grandmaster challenge >series you will notice that not only Did Rebel Draw 2750 rated annand but it >also defeated two very strong grandmasters! The Annand game was on K62-450 >hardware, the others on k63-600. I am not sure that We know exactly How much >Programs actually gain from hardware increases when matched against humans. I >think it is pretty well established that they gain ,no one knows exactly how >well junior6 would have performed on a pent600. I noticed on my pentIII600 >Junior 6 found a significant amount of the moves from dortmund that Deepjr >Played, and this was achieved within Standard tournament time controls. My >opinion is that even the most Knowledable Computer Chess Scientist can only >guess, when it comes to Elo ratings of computers, how much Hardware means, ect, >etc, I think there are alot of unknowns in computer chess, Which makes it so >incredibly interesting. Strangely enough, there were several times at Dortmund that I wished I played on my notebook (Celeron 400) and not on the Primergy server. At times, it appeared to think too much. Examples: Against Piket, Junior picks 9.Bh6 immediately, and everyone around with a notebook saw that. It takes 8 processors and tournament time controls for it to play the smart-aleck 9.Bg5. In the same game, when 31.Qd1 was played, every Junior notebook was showing f4, and of course the right thing psychologically is to play f4 and hope for the best. Against Khalifman, 19.Qd4 appeared at extreme depth, when until then 19.Qc4 was steadily counted as best. In retrospect, obviously Qc4 is better (it avoids the queen exchange, and there's the threat of c3 (or a3) too). The big hardware had its merits of course, and I'm sure the balance is positive. But it's a two-edged sword, and it may all boil down to luck. Amir
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.