Author: Slater Wold
Date: 09:44:25 03/13/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 13, 2002 at 12:39:21, Uri Blass wrote: >On March 13, 2002 at 11:56:59, Slater Wold wrote: > >>On March 13, 2002 at 11:41:42, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On March 13, 2002 at 10:16:56, Slater Wold wrote: >>> >>>>On March 13, 2002 at 07:26:08, Chris Carson wrote: >>>> >>>>>On March 13, 2002 at 04:09:54, Jerry Doby wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>It's hard to believe that anything can be that much strongeer then fritz7 on a >>>>>>fast platform. Is deepblue 100 elo or above deepfritz on an xp 2000 >>>>> >>>>>OK, I will bite and get a debate going most likely. First take a look at: >>>>>http://home.interact.se/~w100107/manmachine.htm >>>>> >>>>>Tony's page has the results for both Top programs today and Deep Blue. >>>>> >>>>>Here is a brief comparison: >>>>> >>>>>Deep Blue 97 2862 6 games >>>>>Chess Tiger 2788 11 games >>>>>Deep Junior 2702 9 games >>>>>Rebel Cen 2697 4 games >>>>>Deep Fritz 2678 12 games >>>>> >>>>>None of the Commercial programs are on fastest HW today. Deep Blue only played >>>>>6 games against one opponent that did not get to prepare (Rebel opponent played >>>>>100 games against Rebel before the match). My guess is that Deep Blue rating >>>>>would drop by 100 to 200 points if put to a serious test. The Commercial >>>>>programs would be 100 points stronger on fastest HW. So they are about the same >>>>>or slight favorite to the commercials. I think Rebel, Tiger on fastest single >>>>>processors and Deep F/J on fastest mps would beat DB 97 in a match. >>>>> >>>>>My conclusion is that 5 years after the match, the commercial programs rule. I >>>>>think that the gap was closed a couple of years ago. >>>> >>>>The thinking here just blows my mind. I cannot even begin to *imagine* why >>>>people would say something so silly. >>>> >>>>You're talking about a chess program, that used the _same_ exact search >>>>techniques that are used in 80% of the top engines today. While 5 years worth >>>>of research probably makes todays top commercial engines more "refined", but >>>>when it comes down to it, they are basically the same. >>>> >>>>With that said, now imagine your search is 100x faster. That has _GOT_ to be >>>>worth some ELO. 200M nps vs Fritz 7's 1M nps (on today's top HW) is hardly >>>>comparable. >>>> >>>>Just use the rule of HW speed. 2x the mhz is usually worth about 50 ELO. It >>>>wouldn't take much to get 250 ELO out of the speed of DB. >>> >>>You forget that programs got 200 elo only by software in the last years. >>>The best commercial program in 1997 is 200 elo weaker than the best program of >>>today in the same hardware. >>> >>>If you remember that there may be diminishing return at higher depthes then it >>>is not clear that the best programs of 1997 with 200M nodes per second are >>>better than the program of today with the hardware of today. >>> >>> >>>Another point is that I guess that deeper blue used some ideas that >>>are probably not good. >>> >>>Nobody use singular extensions in the way that deeper blue used them. >>>Ferret use them but not in the way that deeper blue used them. >>> >>>Crafty18.12 used the deep blue extension. >>>Crafty18.13 does not use it. >>> >>>Why? >>> >>>If the ideas of deeper blue were good then >>>I expect at least part of the other programmers to learn from the ideas >>>and to use them. >>> >>>Uri >> >>W R O N G. >> >>DB used *certain* extensions ONLY because it had the overhead to do so. You >>have a *LOT* of things to play with when you're getting 200M nps, versus 1M nps. >> Crafty getting 200M nps with DB extensions MIGHT have worked better. Getting >>1.2M nps on Hyatt's machine, it did not. Apples to oranges. >> >>Programs have gotten 200 ELO stronger in the last 5 years huh? Get real. The >>_ONLY_ thing that has changed is HW, and ALL the top programmers will tell you >>that. Computer chess advancements are 20% software, 80% hardware. > >please look at >http://www.geocities.com/chessfun_1999/rating.html > >Fritz7 is almost 200 elo better >than Fritz4 and more than 200 elo better than Fritz5. > >Fritz7 is about 250 elo better than Junior4.6 and Junior4.6 was the world >champion in 1997 some months after the match of kasparov-deeper blue. > >I believe that computer chess advancement in the last 5 years are >50% software and 50% hardware. > >Uri Well, I won't argue over 30%. But that list is *no* good. For several reasons: 1.) DB was _never_ intended to play other computers. EVER. 2.) This is on *CURRENT* HW. Ever try to use Shredder 6 on a Pentium Pro 200? 3.) There is a HUGE thread below this one, about Fritz 5.32 being *much* better than Fritz 7.
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.