Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:19:36 08/10/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 10, 2001 at 14:37:50, Les Fernandez wrote: >On August 10, 2001 at 12:47:01, Shep wrote: > >>On August 10, 2001 at 08:03:37, Les Fernandez wrote: >>>Strictly from a speed point of view the above computer is approxiamtely 50,000 >>>times faster then the hardware that was used in the Deeper Blue hardware! >> >>Sorry Les, but this is utterly wrong. >> >>Deeper Blue had a speed of 200 - 1,000 million _nodes_per_second_ in chess. >>This is something completely different from saying it had 0.2 - 1 billion >>instructions per second. >> >>Your calculation would be right if "node" == "instruction", but no computer (not >>even a highly specialized one as DB) can examine one node in one instruction. >> >>--- >>Shep > >Yes Shep you are correct, my statement would only be true if node=intruction. >While we are on the subject how many instructions was Deeper Blue's hardware >able to do? Just curious. > >Thx > >Les It could do at least the following: 1. search. Given the current hardware position, search N plies using normal moves, then do a quiescence search and a static eval at the endpoints. 2. make/unmake. Update the current hardware position given the from and to square and so forth. 3. generate attacks to or from a specific square. I'm not sure this was in all versions, but it was used both for debugging and as a hardware move generator used by the software search to increase speed by avoiding a software move generator. 4. give a static evaluation of the current hardware position. There were a few others to load the evaluation term matrix, etc... Nothing like a general purpose machine as you can tell..
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.