Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:09:40 08/12/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 12, 2002 at 02:52:30, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 11, 2002 at 21:38:29, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On August 10, 2002 at 20:25:16, Michael Babigian wrote: >> >>>On August 10, 2002 at 20:07:12, Jeroen van Dorp wrote: >>> >>>>On August 10, 2002 at 17:41:18, Uri Blass wrote: >>>> >>>>>You cannot decide based on one position that the latest PC software is behind >>>>>Deep blue. >>>> >>>> >>>>Isn't it tricky to compare dedicated hardware based Deep Blue with non-dedicated >>>>software based current commercial programs? >>>>What if a program like Fritz or so would be adapted or compiled to be used as a >>>>hardware configuration like Deep Blue? >>>> >>>>Just speculating, I don't know the answer. >>>> >>>>J. >>>I see what your getting at, but I'm not disputing the clever programming in >>>today's software. I'm just noting the relative strengths between systems. I'm >>>sure if Fritz could calculate as fast as Deeper Blue, it would likely play >>>better in a match. I just don't think that the current level of "clever >>>programming" is yet enough to make up for the speed handicap. >>> >>>Mike >> >> >>This is _the_ point that goes overlooked all the time. >> >>DB was _very_ good. _and_ very fast. I wouldn't venture to speculate >>whether a commercial program might have a somewhat better search or not. >>But _not_ enough better to offset that huge computational speed advantage. >>And _no_ programming tricks are going to offset that speed either. > >I am not going to argue about deep blue here but >I think that it is wrong to assume that no programming tricks >are going to offset speed difference of being 100 times faster. It wasn't "just 100 times faster". It was more like 1000-2000 times faster. For reasons I have explained before. NPS is one thing. Evaluation is another. > >I believe that the only reason that programs failed to do it >is that people failed to write the right program. > >I think that the task of offsetting speed difference >is relatively easier when the hardware get faster because >better search algorithms can increase the difference >between programs at longer time control. > >Uri I don't think it is "easy" at all, myself...
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.