Author: Gregor Overney
Date: 11:01:00 09/07/01
Go up one level in this thread
>I agree that Deeper blue was the best at 1997 but programmers learned a lot >after 1997. > I am not too sure about those algorithmic improvements that have been achieved from 1997 until 2001. For example, take Junior 5 and the newest version of it. Give version 5 a PIII/850 and the older one a PII/400. You can repeat this test with Crafty from '97 and with the newest version 18.10. No great algorithmic improvements have been made that make a slower system with the newest engine win against an older version running on a significantly faster machine. Actually, regarding Crafty, I sometimes get the impression that 18.10 is not the strongest version of Crafty. Therefore, deep fritz vs. Kramnik compares with deep blue vs. Kasparov like, well.... apples with oranges. 6M nodes gives you not much more ply's compared to a fast PC with 0.8M nodes. The difficulties deep blue had to win against Kasparov partially proof that IBM was a little bit lucky to win this game in '97. With giving Kasparov more rest and giving him the chance to play against deep blue before the match would have made a difference. When do we see a commercially available program/system that beats the acting world champ in Chess under official match conditions? I guess in 2010. We are not there yet with systems like deep fritz, even with 64 CPUs running at one 1GHz each. And with the most recent difficulties in the computer industry, progress in CPU design might even get slowed down. Gregor
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.