Author: Hristo
Date: 16:19:55 01/28/01
Go up one level in this thread
Christophe, I do beleive you are "wrong" (! ;-) ) and Jorge is correct. However Jorges test doesn't undoubtedly prove his conclusion. In some cases it is not a prove at all. ;-) It is much more likely that some programs benefit more from increased CPU (memory, ...) performance than others. This is the case with many computer aided algoritms in general! Take for example linear search versus binary search. Then use those algorithms on a slow computer than can only generate 10 items to be searched and another faster computer that can generate 1000 items. This is self evident, no?! Computer chess programs present us with a significantly more complicated algoritm which in its own right is not a perfect solution to the problem at hand (chess). Firstly the benefit from improved performance might not be large enough to measure. Secondly the "benefit" (extra more ply than the opponent) might cause worst game results. (!!!) Perhaps someone has done this before. Take two computers C1 and C2. Where C1 is half the speed of C2. Take two programs A and B. Play a match of 100 games using the same program on both computers: dA = A-on-C1 vs A-on-C2 dB = B-on-C1 vs B-on-C2 ? dA > dB then A benefits more from higher speed. This is not perfect test. However I'm sure you are going to get consistently different (dA != dB) results. It would be interesting to know what a test like that yelds ... ;-) hristo
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.