Author: Steve Maughan
Date: 20:24:24 05/19/01
Go up one level in this thread
Chris, >I didn't realize Palms are so slow, according to these figures a Palm IIIx, >overclocked at 26 mhz, is about 670 times slower than an Athlon 1 ghz. >Obviously evaluation functions are different but I believe that my mid eighties >Novag Constellation runs at approx 1,000 NPS on a 2mhz 6502 processor. >Of course this means that your program must be very good to give a strong game >on such a slow machine. I'm not 100% sure but I don't think the 2 MHz 6502 could ever reach 1000 nps. Maybe Ed could verify this as he produced quite a few programs for this processor. If it did then it would be super dump. As I remember the slow 6502s could do 100 - 300 nps. The Z80 at 4 Mhz would do about the same. It was a big jump when the 68000, like the Palm's, came in and the nodes 'hit' 1000 nps. But these machines were *nowhere* near as knowledge rich as the latest programs. Richard Lang's were the most intelligent assembler optimised programs but still not as knowledge rich as something like Chess Tiger. Steve
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.