Author: Peter Berger
Date: 00:17:23 08/31/01
Go up one level in this thread
On August 31, 2001 at 02:44:52, Christophe Theron wrote: >No I just assume better branching factor from my program. > >Tiger needs less time than Genius to complete each successive iteration, and the >effects of this better branching factor shows up more clearly when more >iterations (ply depths) are completed. > >In sports, we would say that Genius has more explosive power (is a good >sprinter) but gets tired very quickly. So if the race lasts longer, Tiger does >not get tired when Genius is exhausted already. > >You are not going to see this difference if you let them run only short races. > I don't disagree at all ( the diminishing return remark was supposed to be a joke) and everyone can see this effect on current CPUs. The question is at which speed this effect really kicks in . It it a 200 or a 400 meter race ? Or will ChessTiger need a marathon :) ? I expect ChessTiger will do well in sprints, too btw . Until the 486 came out Genius was probably still in active development. I assume _if_ it was optimized for _any_ speed it was probably tournament time control on a 386 or 486 CPU . Genius finds several very clever moves at fast times where modern programs probably will rely to get them anyway with search . pete
This page took 0.01 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.