Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Much of Deep Blue's parallel searching was wasted >>>

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 06:37:34 10/04/02

Go up one level in this thread


On October 04, 2002 at 08:18:19, Shep wrote:

>On October 04, 2002 at 06:55:44, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
>
>>On October 04, 2002 at 06:53:03, Uri Blass wrote:
>>
>>>If you take a program with bad search rules and give it 200M
>>>nodes per second then it can beat Deep Fritz at blitz but not
>>>at tournament time control.
>>
>>I would say, maybe not even in blitz.
>
>I agree. Don't forget the best blitz players are slower searchers like Tiger and
>Hiarcs.
>
>---
>Shep

The difference in nodes per second is not 200M against 3M

It is possible to test it with public weak programs that use inferior
algorithms.

Take for example the public movei.

If I give it 20M nodes per move against 0.3M nodes per move of Fritz then I
expect Movei to beat Fritz but if I give it 1000M nodes per move against 15M
nodes per move of Deep Fritz then I expect Deep Fritz to beat movei.

This is only a guess and I did not check it.
If people want to check it then they can do it.

Public Movei does not support analysis but people can use setup position and
give it long time control of 72 hours per game so it is going to use more than
an hour per move and it has no problem to search 1000M nodes in an hour on fast
hardware(not on mine).

They can use the option move now after time that is eqvivalent to the relevant
number of nodes or use the debug file to decide about the move of movei after
number of nodes that is big enough.

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.