Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Questions for Mr. Hyatt about Deep Blue

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 10:01:55 02/18/02

Go up one level in this thread


On February 18, 2002 at 12:24:43, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On February 18, 2002 at 11:46:12, Aaron Gordon wrote:
>
>>Actually you can hit 1M nps in Crafty on a regular old AMD Thunderbird at
>>1.65GHz. That means you'd need ~330GHz to hit 200mnps. Of course if you were to
>>run a system such as this (say, 256 cpu's) in a cluster then you'd lose a heck
>>of a lot of NPS. Also lets say we used Myrinet and TTL_Papers and 'total' gained
>>a speedup of 128 x one cpu with 256 cpu's. I'm not sure how realistic that
>>number is but it 'seems' alright if you consider using an experienced cluster
>>designer along with good code. This will of course put you at 128mnps using the
>>1.65GHz tbirds. By the time you get something like this built there will be 2GHz
>>AMD Thoroughbred cpu's (0.13 micron AthlonXP's).
>
>Figure speedup = 1 + (N-1)*.7 for reasonable numbers of processors.  I
>don't know that that will hold for N very large, say 128.
>
>Also, even if a CPU could run at 330ghz, we need a memory breakthrough or
>else it won't be 330 times faster than a 1ghz cpu today.
>
>
>
>
>>
>>If you figure 1 * 2 / 1.65 then that 2GHz XP would put you at 1.21212~Mnps. That
>>x 128 = 155.15Mnps. While not as fast as Deep Blue I think most of todays
>>programs should outplay Deep Blue with a little tuning (like cutting back on the
>>selectivity/pruning a bit). In the case of CT14 & Fritz7 actually running at
>>this sort of nps then most definately it will exceed Deep Blue strength. Perhaps
>>even around 50-80mnps.
>
>
>There is a _huge_ difference between what Deep Blue "knew" and what the two
>programs you mention "know".  And knowledge is important against strong
>human players...

Deeper blue had not enough time to tune their evaluation
I do not believe that the evaluation of it was better than the top programs of
today.

The quality of knowledge is more important then the quantity.

I agree that knowledge is important in comp-humans games

Kasparov knew nothing about Deep blue.
Humans today know a lot about ct14 or F7 because they are commercial and humans
can play against them and learn their weaknesses.

This knowledge is important in comp-human games.

Uri



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.