Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:24:34 10/20/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 20, 2000 at 15:15:11, Dave Gomboc wrote: >On October 20, 2000 at 09:33:14, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On October 20, 2000 at 00:13:18, Dave Gomboc wrote: >> >>>On October 19, 2000 at 21:08:06, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On October 19, 2000 at 16:51:49, Albert Silver wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 18, 2000 at 09:56:52, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On October 18, 2000 at 05:44:36, Andrew Williams wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>My apologies if this is old news. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>There was an account called DeepBlueJr watching Kramnik-Kasparov, game 6 >>>>>>>on ICC last night. The finger notes said the owner was Murray Campbell >>>>>>>(a couple of the admins stated that it was indeed DeepBlueJr). I asked >>>>>>>him what exactly he was using and he said that it was a 24-processor >>>>>>>version attached to a R/6000. He said the processors were the same ones >>>>>>>that ran in the Deeper Blue that beat Kasparov. I asked him what NPS he >>>>>>>was getting and he said "looks like 28M" (!). I also asked him what sorts >>>>>>>of depths it was searching, but he didn't answer. Another thing he didn't >>>>>>>answer was my suggestion that he join CCT2 :-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>The program wasn't kibitzing automatically like crafty does, but he was >>>>>>>occasionally cutting and pasting the analysis into channel 211. This was >>>>>>>around the time that Kramnik was on top, before the win seemed to slip >>>>>>>away from him. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Andrew >>>>>>> >>>>>>>PS Just in case anyone was wondering, I asked him if he minded my reporting >>>>>>>this conversation here and he was quite happy for me to do so. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>I was surprised, too. But I did chat with him a good bit and am convinced that >>>>>>it was Murray. I will try to bug him a bit about CCT2, but I have a suspicion >>>>>>that IBM won't allow public exhibitions like that... >>>>> >>>>>Really.... Wow. When he posted that, I was convinced some joker had set up the >>>>>pseudo as a prank. (Sorry about that Andrew) >>>>> >>>>>Did you ask him about the tuning? Have they done any work on refining the eval >>>>>or is it unchanged from the time of the match? 28 million NPS... Wonder how much >>>>>that cuts in to the depths compared to its bigger brother. >>>>> >>>>> Albert >>>> >>>> >>>>I didn't understand the 28M number, but my screen was so danged busy scrolling >>>>all the nerdy comments from the 1000 people observing the game, that I didn't >>>>get a chance to ask him. 24 processors at >= 2M nodes per second per processor >>>>should be 48M. I assumed he typoed when he said 28M. >>>> >>>>It (DB Jr) was a holy terror against GMs in the many exhibitions they played >>>>prior to the final DB match. This machine would be less than 10x slower than >>>>the real machine. I would think it would be a handful for anybody. >>> >>>24 processors? Hmm... 16? >>> >>>Dave >> >> >>He definitely said 24. Of course he might have meant 16. 24 caught my eye >>as that would be three 'modules' of DB hardware. No reason why it couldn't >>be right now, as the workstation he was using might be faster than the one >>they had when they were touring the world with DB Jr. And a faster host would >>need more chess processors to maintain the right "balance". > >I didn't realize you were quoting him; I had just been musing. > >Murray will be giving a talk here (at the U of A) sometime this month or next, >but unfortunately he won't be here for long, so it's likely to be an in-and-out >affair. > >Dave Don't forget to ask him about DBjr's hardware, etc. Would be interesting data..
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.