Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 11:46:22 05/04/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 04, 2001 at 14:10:59, Uri Blass wrote: [snip] >Yes but in the WCCC of 1995 Fritz was also clearly slower and I also believe in >diminishing returns so 2M against 60M is not the same as >0.1M against 3M. I think you are right, they are not the same. At 60M, the advantage is FAR greater. At stupendous rates like that, you can start to see positionally. Against a human, I think it will prove to be remarkably better. There are a lot of positions that take an hour to solve. Now, solve 60 times faster and we are talking about solving them in one minute. Problems that looked completely intractible before suddenly become EASILY solvable at 40/2 time controls. That Compaq machine *might* be the strongest chess machine ever to operate on the face of the earth. The combination of algorithms and speed could even reach Deep Blue levels of performance[*]. A multiplier of 124 in horsepower is simply too great. Even a superior program will not stand a chance against that kind of horsepower unless they can come up with something within an order of magnitude at least. * perhaps. We'll probably never know. And if Hsu/Campbell got the backing, they could create something one thousand times stronger.
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.