Author: Otello Gnaramori
Date: 15:05:09 11/17/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 17, 2001 at 17:42:45, Jesper Antonsson wrote: >On November 17, 2001 at 08:11:45, Uri Blass wrote: >>On November 17, 2001 at 08:03:10, Otello Gnaramori wrote: > >>>Uri, I know that Fritz has better software algorithms than D.B. , but Deep >>Blue has on its favour the power of an IBM SP/2 server equipped with a large >>number of special-purpose chips. >>>By using over 200 of these chips the overall speed of the program could be >>>raised to 200 million positions per second. >> >>I know that Deeper blue had better hardware but my impression based on analysis >>of the game is that the better algorithms of Deep Fritz was enough compensation >>for it. > >Uri and Otello, could you please share your analysises? To me it seems like a >given that Fritz would be crushed in a match against DB and that DBs eval is at >least not worse. DB has an overwhelming NPS advantage *and* the possibility to >do complex eval for free in hardware *and* PhDs and grandmasters that worked on >the algorithms, eval, book etc. If you really think that Fritz can stand up to >what they accomplished, I'd like to see what you base that on. > >Jesper Hi Jesper, The evidence that nowadays chess programs are better optimized than Deep Blue's software is that when you are talking about D.B. you are actually talking about a project stopped in '97. Since then many things changed and evolved both in hardware and in software research to make better computer chess machines: we have a clear evidence of this fact looking at recent man-machine challenges with the outstanding results of Chess Tiger in Argentina as an example, and with the incoming challenge Kramnik vs. Fritz7 , unbelievable few years ago in the personal computer class. Regards, Otello
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.