Author: blass uri
Date: 04:10:17 06/12/98
Go up one level in this thread
On June 11, 1998 at 18:27:25, Mark Young wrote: >>>Just for fun I tried to answer this. My data shows about a 45 point gain >>>in rating if you double the speed of a program running on a P II 266. >> >>what is the fast time control that you doubled in your data? >>> >>>You would need a P II 93000 >>>to get a 3.125 point elo gain, if you doubled its speed. Running todays >>>software. >> >>how did you get 93000? >>what is the formula that you are based on? >>> >I took my data that I had on NPS matches. Noted the change in rating >performance for the data I had. What it showed was as computers get >faster the change in rating from a doubling get less and less. So from >my data I calculated how fast a P II would have to be in MHz to only >gain 2 to 5 elo points, if its speed were doubled. I do not understand what is the formula doubling get less you say f(266)=45(you gain 45 elo on aPII266) f(93000)=3.125 but what is the function f you are based on? f(x)=c/(x^d) when c and d are constants can be a function. >Based on my limited >data. Now remember this is for a computer playing chess at 3 min a >move. If a P II 93000 only played at one sec a move then a doubling >would gain more points. >The same way as it does today. The faster the time control the more >rating gain you will get playing a slower computer. Example PII 300 Vs >PII 266 playing the same program. At 3 min a move avg. The ratings gain >from a P II 266 to a P II 300 is next to nothing. If you played them at >1 sec a move avg. The gain in ratings because much more. >I don't claim this will be accurate. As the data was made with many >chess programs old and new. But I think it might be somewhat close. > >Don’t take this too seriously as it was done in fun. > >The formula was based on the data. Noting the change in rating to the >change in speed of the computer. On a doubling at 3 min a move. > > > > > > > > > > >>>It may not be right. But I gave it a try.:) >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>My speculation is 10-20 as the current top programs at such fast >>>>machines are already so good that they can't be slaughtered with >>>>your suggested 5-25. >>>> >>>>- Ed - >>>> >>>> >>>>>This just will tell us nothing. I suppose you think differently. So can >>>>>you please explain what kind of lesson you are expecting from this? >>>> >>>>>But OK, as I said, this has to be done at least one time. >>>> >>>>>And BTW I hope to be wrong. I like to be surprised! >>>> >>>>> 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.