Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 12:31:57 03/28/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 28, 2001 at 13:48:06, Joshua Lee wrote:
>I think that some of the data is wrong if you use the 1.7X for a dual a Dual
>1Ghz would be 1.7Ghz and obviously this is a bigger difference than 1Ghz as you
>have nearly 2xthan the 1Ghz machine. All the calculations sound like they make
>sense but when somebody says that it would only net 25-35elo i have to begin to
>wonder.
You don't have to wonder. Read what I have written carefully!
>All the stats ive heard before but the numbers seem to change to people's
>liking is it 30 or 60 for doubling? or is it 70?, SSDF says it's 79 but hey
>that can't make sense if you triple it's 90 which is too close to 79.
Last time I checked it was 70 elo for doubling, and I have computed these
figures from the SSDF list (not the latest however).
Some people say 70 will not be sustained for higher and higher speeds (depths),
and if it is the case then the gain for a dual is going to be less than what I
have written.
>Clearly when you look at various Computerchess events and the results you will
>see for example most of the hardware is either a quad or an 8-way which means
>with our single processor they get 3.1 to 5.9 nearly 6 times as much.
>Even though these servers don't search the tree in the same way i have found
>that you can still come up with the same stuff they do but just with waiting
>longer. I would put my money on the stronger side even with 400games wouldn't
>you?
Did I write something else?
Have you really read my message?
Christophe
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.