Author: Chris Carson
Date: 12:32:24 07/27/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 27, 2000 at 15:22:27, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On July 27, 2000 at 15:01:43, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On July 27, 2000 at 14:41:20, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >> >>>On July 27, 2000 at 14:14:11, Eugene Nalimov wrote: >>> >>>>Tom, next time please read the available papers before jumping into discussion. >>> >>>I believe Bob about the 480 processors, esp. b/c Andrew just posted the relevant >>>information from Hsu's paper. >>> >>>The reason I jumped into this discussion is because Hyatt got aggressive with >>>Chris when Chris called 1B NPS into question. That behavior is not appropriate. >>> >>>-Tom >> >> >>I got aggressive when someone tells me I am making up numbers, even though I >>give them a pointer to a journal article that contains the actual data I was >>quoting. And _MY_ behavior is not appropriate? > >I've only seen you say "read Hsu's IEEE article." No date, no page number, no >paragraph number, no line number. No direct quote, either. People should not be >expected to do this kind of research for you. The fact that you like to see >people do research on their own is not appropriate. This is a discussion forum, >not one of your classes. > >-Tom Albet Silver posted a notice about the IEEE article. I asked him which IEEE article and that I would read it when I had some time. Bob started quoting the IEEE article after that. Check the threads. It did happen very close together, so Bob may have posted first, but I did not see it, I saw the post from Albert. Albert e-mailed me the article and I thanked him. One thing is for sure, Bob did not quote the article when this debate started and wated a long time before posting. Article at best confirmed 480 chips. So what? Also, there are descrepancies between IEEE articles as Tom and Ed have pointed out. The bottom line is DB averaged 200M NPS and that was a guess because no test was ever done on the DB system to get a number (acording to Bob), thus the 200M NPS may or may not be correct, it is a SWAG and proves nothing about the DB vs Micor debate. It was a red hearing. Best Regards, Chris Carson
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.