Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: How Much Stronger is Deepblue then Todays Computers?

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 08:52:56 03/14/02

Go up one level in this thread


On March 13, 2002 at 07:26:08, Chris Carson wrote:

Chess is a matter of the weakest chain.

You can analyze the deepblue-kasparov games and even with
not a too high rating it is not so hard using analysis from
for example Seirawan that
  a) Kasparov played openings he knows nothing from
  b) Kasparov blundered away material for vague compensation
  c) Kasparov played very bad games in general. Like 6 simple
     errors a game. Kasparov especially makes errors in positions
     where making a good move would chancelessly win from Deep Blue.
     Plenty of examples here. Against top GMS kasparov makes no bad
     moves or perhaps 1 a game which is 'dubious'. Sure no 2200 level
     mistakes which he made on average 5 from against deep blue each
     game.

The weak points from Deep Blue are obvious
  a) book. its tournament book was 4000 moves only. Given in by
     hand by a GM. After that an automatic book. From world
     computer championships we know how CHANCELESS such books
     are against nowadays programs with huge hand made books.
  b) Search depth from deep blue was 11-12 ply, not a single program
     nowadays is getting such small depths at 40 in 2 level at the
     latest hardware
  c) many Deep Blue chips were pressed just 2 weeks before the match.
     Also they mixed different chips, just to get more NPS. Search
     depth was not the issue. It didn't even have killermoves in
     hardware search.
     A not very well tested program is chanceless. Hardware OR software.

Deep Blue 1997 if it would play with book from then against modern program
would get crushed *completely*.

Not a simple loss it will be. It will be complete annihilation.

Please compare next. Nimzo98 in 1998 was very strong. Nowadays programs
completely annihilate it too.

>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.



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.