Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 03:36:58 01/07/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 07, 2002 at 05:56:55, Bas Hamstra wrote: [snip] >I have seen these arguments, but they absolutely don't convince me. This kind of >hurting is *nothing* compared to the hurting that is currently going on, where >someone on a P3-700 has to compete with a fast quad machine in a tournament. In the past, there have been entrants on dedicated hardware like the Fidelity and Kasparov Sparc. Those would be eliminated (perhaps a phantom dragon, since dedicated hardware has fallen out of favor). In the past there have been experimental entries like Hsu & Campbell's original effort. Nobody is trying the IC route anymore, so probably a phantom dragon. In the past, there have been MacIntosh entries. The Mac is falling out of favor, but there are still Mac programs around (including some that run *only* on the Mac). I'm just pointing out that the uniform hardware solution is not ideal in all cases. Also, for uniform hardware, someone has to cough up the expense of renting all the equal hardware. Perhaps sponsors could be arranged for that. I think a problem that will appear is that those who can easily afford the hottest hardware will want to maintain that purely mechanical edge. In other words, if you can easily come up with a ten thousand dollar machine to use on the contest, you will want to keep the hardware specification as undefined. I think that uniform platform is a good idea if it can be arranged. But I think arranging it is the hard part.
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.