Author: Robert Henry Durrett
Date: 13:32:28 06/07/02
Go up one level in this thread
On June 07, 2002 at 15:55:07, Russell Reagan wrote: >I think 64-bit will be a big step, and then the next big step will probably be >256-bit, which would allow an entire position to be stored in a single 256-bit >value (64 squares at 4-bits each). I could forsee there being advantages to >this. Maybe a new kind of bitboard, maybe a nibbleboard? Regardless of the name, >you could implement some kind of scheme to where making a move would be as >simple as doing an XOR operation. Eventually when computers have large enough >word lengths, we will be able to do a lot of cool things I think. Maybe >generating legal moves at a single CPU instruction (AND, OR, XOR, whatever) per >move, making a move in a single instruction, unmaking a move with the SAME XOR >operation (that sounds really cool to me, XOR it in, XOR it out), and so on. We >will probably see (at least) 100GHz processors in our lifetime. If such a chess >program were to be developed that made use of such simple CPU instructions, that >would mean a program would crunch through about 2.8 billion NPS. A computer like >that could search 40 plies ahead in about 6.5 minutes. I suppose by then we'll >have bigger EGTB completed, and if you rigged up 32 of these processors on a >machine, you could search pretty deep and maybe even find a mate from the >opening position. Probably not, but it's interesting nonetheless. > >Russell I really like your idea!! Sadly, I won't be here to see it. :( Maybe the multiprocessors will come sooner. I would expect better than 32-processor machines by the time that most PCs are 256-bit. But who knows? When to expect these things? Bob D.
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.