Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 18:00:42 01/15/01
Go up one level in this thread
On January 15, 2001 at 18:13:00, Bas Hamstra wrote: >On January 15, 2001 at 11:25:53, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On January 15, 2001 at 10:45:21, Kim Roper Jensen wrote: >> >>>Hi >>> >>>I just wondered, If u have a slow processor how would u program it to play chess >>>?? >>> >>>I mean will u try to create a big eval and hope it selects "good & natural" >>>moves and have small depths, or do u try make a small eval and hope u can >>>calculate to a reasonable depth ???? >>> >>>Or is there no difference in program design, when u program a fast or slow >>>processor ?? >>> >>>With regards and thamks in advance >>>Kim >> >> >>There is definitely a "balance" point between evaluation and search. If you >>slow the machine down enough so that the big eval causes the search to be >>unable to reach a reasonable depth, then you have a positionally smart but >>tactically stupid program. The inverse can happen as easily. Striking a >>good balance between smarts and tactics is a big issue... > >Question is: is that balance different for slow cpu's? And question 2 is: are >you going to play fast cpu's? That extremely hard to compete anyway. For a game >between 2 very slow processors I would think the balance would more go to less >smart, more tactical, faster, than for fast processors. Stuff it with extensions >and make a Genius. For fast processors that doesn't work. > >Bas. I believe that the cpu speed makes a difference. I believe that it is possible (and probable) that if you play program A vs B, where A is designed and tested to run on a 200mhz processor, and B is designed on a 1ghz processor, that if both use 200 mhz processors, A will win, and if both use 1ghz processors, B will win. I had a similar problem in testing/developing Cray Blitz on a vax, but running it on a Cray. It was a real problem.
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.