Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 14:01:47 11/07/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 07, 2001 at 14:51:50, Steven Schwartz wrote:
>On November 07, 2001 at 14:01:31, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On November 07, 2001 at 09:31:57, Steven Schwartz wrote:
>>
>>>On November 06, 2001 at 23:27:06, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>>
>>>>On November 06, 2001 at 14:26:18, Steven Schwartz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On November 06, 2001 at 14:13:25, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On November 06, 2001 at 13:59:41, O. Veli wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Hello to all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have seen the following info about Star Sapphire:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Advanced SH7034 RISC processor (1M ROM and 256K RAM) and High Speed 20MHz energy
>>>>>>>saving CMOS TECHNOLOGY including Hash Tables.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How comparable is the RISC processor with DragonBall used in Palms? Since we
>>>>>>>have already 33MHz Palms, and strong programs such as ChessTiger and ChessGenius
>>>>>>>for Palm, does Star Sapphire have a chance to claim to be world's strongest
>>>>>>>portable unit? Can RISC processor and/or 1M ROM add to its strength for the
>>>>>>>deficiency in speed? Thanks.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I do not know how the SH7034 compares to the DragonBall.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>One thing I know is that you can FORGET ABOUT COMPARING THE MHz. It's
>>>>>>meaningless.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>The amount of ROM has no meaning either. I could use several Mb for Chess Tiger
>>>>>>for Palm if I wanted to, either for the program (code), the opening book, or the
>>>>>>hash tables. On some Palms I could use 16Mb.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I do not know how the Star Sapphire will compare to Chess Tiger for Palm, but
>>>>>>I'm already almost certain that it will be washed away by PocketPC chess
>>>>>>programs like ChessGenius running on the iPaq.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>So its claim to be the world's strongest portable unit is bullshit.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I have also received an ad today from ICD claiming its elo is between 2400-2550
>>>>>>elo. That must be expressed in BS elo (Baby School).
>>>>>> Christophe
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>You may very well be right about the strength issue vs. the various
>>>>>palm-top computers. We won't have any firm answers for several months.
>>>>>It actually was not our intent to compare the Star Sapphire with those
>>>>>devices but rather chess computers. As I mentioned earlier, maybe using
>>>>>the word "dedicated" would have been a better choice.
>>>>>
>>>>>As far as the estimated rating... we based the 2400 to 2550 on Novag's
>>>>>estimate of 2550 and our belief that the computer was likely to be 50
>>>>>or more stronger than the 2350 we put on the Sapphire II (the Star
>>>>>Sapphire's predecessor).
>>>>>Steve (ICD/Your Move Chess & Games)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>The Sapphire II is rated 2012 by the SSDF. Maybe 2100 because the SSDF
>>>>subtracted 100 points to all the computers in the list, and while it was
>>>>justified for the top, it was less justified for the bottom of the list.
>>>>
>>>>IIRC the Sapphire II already had the same processor as the Star Sapphire.
>>>>
>>>>I have a hard time believing that the program would have improved so much that
>>>>it would now be 50, 100 or 150 elo points stronger.
>>>>
>>>>So I think your figures are overevaluated, even in USCF elo.
>>>> Christophe
>>>
>>>
>>>The ratings of chess computers have been a disaster for years. We
>>>have always tried to impart a little sanity into the situation by
>>>never listening to manufacturers. However, the Star Sapphire is
>>>about 6 to 8 weeks away, and we have not had a machine to test. So,
>>>we do the best we can.
>>>
>>>I recall that Enrique Irazoqui and Larry Kaufman used to tell us to
>>>add 180 points to the SSDF list to get USCF equivalents. If the
>>>older Sapphire II is rated 2012 by SSDF and if they subtracted 100
>>>points to make the ratings more in line with reality, and if we add
>>>180 to get the USCF version, then that would put the Sapphire II at
>>>2292.
>>>
>>>Also, the Sapphire II runs on a "RISC-style" H-8 Hitachi chip whereas
>>>the new Star Sapphire runs in a 68EZ328 true RISC. I am not a wizard
>>>on microprocessors, but I believe that the "EZ" chip is much faster.
>>>Maybe, some of the members of the group can enlighten me on the
>>>differences.
>>
>>
>>
>>I don't understand how they can tell you such bullshit.
>>
>>The 68EZ328 microprocessor from Motorola is also called the "DragonBall" EZ.
>>It's the microprocessor you can find in many older Palms including the PalmVx.
>>
>>It is not the latest DragonBall. The latest is called DragonBall VZ, and it's in
>>the newest Palms, including the m505 and the latest Visors from Handspring.
>>
>>The DragonBall VZ is faster than the EZ. The EZ runs at 20MHz by default, the VZ
>>defaults at 33MHz. Both are overclockable but I doubt that the Star Sapphire
>>will have an overclocked one.
>>
>>The DragonBalls (68xx328) processors are not RISC processors at all. They have a
>>68000 core (you can find a 68000 in many older chess computers). I think it's
>>the first time in the world a company dares to say that the 68000 is a RISC. The
>>H8 was more RISC than the 68EZ328!
>>
>>So basically they sell an unit which has an outdated processor, which happens to
>>be the processor used in 2 years ago Palms. That's not surprising, given that
>>they announce the Star sapphire since 2 years.
>>
>>The current Palms have a faster processor, and this processor can be overclocked
>>(many users of Chess Tiger for Palm can make their Palm 2 to 2.5 times faster
>>with an overclocking utility).
>>
>>Owners of a Palm will have a 2x to 4x faster computer than the Star Sapphire.
>>
>>With this information in mind, I would not be surprised if the Star Sapphire was
>>actually weaker than the Sapphire II.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Additionally, the older II had 160K ROM and 129K RAM whereas the
>>>Star has 1M ROM and 256K RAM.
>>>We used to quote 2300 to 2350 for the Sapphire II while Novag was
>>>quoting mid 2400s, and we sold quite a few, and I recall no complaints
>>>about the playing strength at all. Based upon program upgrades (which
>>>we can only assume are in place because the Star will be almost three
>>>years newer than the II), micro-processor upgrades, RAM and ROM upgrades,
>>>suggesting that the Star will be a minimum of 50 to 100 points stronger,
>>>in my opinion, is not a stretch at all. But we shall see.
>>
>>
>>
>>It's not really a microprocessor upgrade. It looks rather like a downgrade.
>>
>>More RAM and more ROM does not guarantee more strength.
>>
>>50 to 100 elo points stronger would be a HUGE jump, especially on a slow
>>processor. And especially since we have not heard about the author of the
>>program since quite a long time.
>>
>>I think you should be more careful about the manufacturer's claims on this
>>device.
>> Christophe
>
>
>Let's not vote on this, but I AM a moron!!!
>
>When I took the data from the literature to respond to you, I
>looked at a letter that we received from Novag in November of
>1999. That is when they announced the Star Sapphire and still
>had the Sapphire II listed so I could compare the two microprocessors.
>
>However, the 68EZ328 is NOT what the Star Sapphire is being produced
>with now. The CURRENT literature says clearly (to normal people but
>not me) that it is an "Advanced SH7034 RISC processor (1M ROM and 256K RAM)".
>That was actually a link in our emailed promotion:
>http://www.icdchess.com/cpreviews/star.html
>
>So, the question now is how does this compare with the palm-tops, and
>does your opinion of its strength differ?
>
>As I said earlier, I know very little about processors and I proved
>that beyond a shadow of a doubt.
>Steve (ICD/Your Move Chess & Games)
:)
But we are here to help! :)
I do not know what the SH7034 is worth. Is there any additional information?
I have read that it is a 20MHz processor. However I do not know how it compares
to the Palm's DragonBall at the same speed (comparing MHz only is risky).
Anybody knows?
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.