Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: LCT II Fin4, Deep Thought, and Deep Blue (was Re: LCT II results...)

Author: Willie Wood

Date: 22:40:22 01/07/98

Go up one level in this thread

On January 07, 1998 at 22:55:57, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On January 07, 1998 at 14:40:27, Willie Wood wrote:
>>you wrote >>
>>When I worked with the 6502 processor I hardly did any extensions as
>>with the slow 4-5 Mhz this was quite dangerous. I tried more extensions
>>in the Milano program which should have been the main improvement over
>>the Polgar. It didn't work. 500-600 NPS doesn't justify that.
>>I didn't know you did those programs.  Amazing what one learns...  I
>>wrote a 6502 chess program in 1978, and I believe the processor ran at 1
>>mhz. You must have been working with the hotrod 6502. :)
>>btw, you might be interested to know that, on my powerbook 5300ce, which
>>is a ppc 603e running at 117 mhz, Hiarcs 6 (PPC) runs at 328 nps.  This
>>is an average taken from an epd test suite done for the upcoming KKKup.
>>This result has been verified on another 5300.  But the point is, it
>>plays a darned good game nonetheless, and I would venture to say the
>>extensions are pretty extensive.
>I think Ed was simply relating something we've all encountered.  Things
>that work poorly at slow speeds sometime work well at faster speed.  IE
>imagine a program that can only search 5 plies deep.  And you find some
>neat extension idea, but while it does extend in some useful cases, it
>drops you to 4 plies everywhere else.  Does it pay off?  probably not,
>because the difference between a 4 ply and a 5 ply program is much more
>noticable than if this program started at 10 plies and had to drop back
>to only 9...
>I tried singular extensions in 1978 and it dropped me from 5 back to 4,
>and I decided (eventually) that it was no good.  Hsu tried it with much
>faster hardware and it worked.  It even seems to work well for him at
>100K nps based on the match he ran, which has convinced me to give this
>another try later on...


Yes, I understood Ed's point, my comment was meant to elicit some
response on the incredible (non)-perfomance of Hiarcs on that platform,
given it's obvious strength.


This page took 0.01 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.