Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 23:26:30 06/09/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 09, 2001 at 23:43:14, Bruce Moreland wrote:
>On June 09, 2001 at 23:16:54, Chris Kantack wrote:
>
>>Perhaps I'm missing something....(hence, this post). I'm wondering what all the
>>excitement is regarding Kramnik vs. Deep Fritz or any other similar match going
>>on (with Grandmasters) this year.
>>
>>As I recall, the 2nd Deep Blue match that IBM had with Garry Kasparov was a very
>>specialized machine with many processors especially made to process chess
>>positions. I've heard several times where (the 2nd version) of Deep Blue was
>>able to calculate 200 million positions per second.
>>
>>Now, I've recently read where Deep Fritz (in its recent match against Deep
>>Junior) was able to calculate (only) 1 million positions per second.
>>
>>So now, this autumn, we're to see a match between Kramnik and a computer with a
>>"chess computational" speed of only 1/200 of what Garry faced in 1997.
>>
>>So...like, what's the big deal? Should be an easy win for Kramnik.
>>(Especially easy as he'll have the program in advance to play with to his
>>hearts' content.)
>>
>>Chris Kantack
>>http://home.earthlink.net/~kantack/lcdchess/home.htm
>
>This is part of what bothers me about the DB match. People think that chess on
>any other platform is necessarily boring, because of course, DB has solved
>chess, or is at least miles ahead of everything else.
>
>Independent of whether it is miles ahead of everything else, it's sick that they
>created this situation and then they *won't play*.
>
>bruce
...And if the Kramnik match had been designed to correct this and reignite
interest in computer chess...?
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.