Author: David Dory
Date: 03:43:02 10/17/02
Go up one level in this thread
I think Hsu's claims regarding DB's prowess comes from what I perceive Hsu's logic to be, namely: If you build a system that is one or more orders of magnitude faster in hardware; then building a world champ chess program is just a matter of time, money and work. The software can be updated, improved, refined. Same for hardware as witnessed in the change from DB to DB2. Hsu and DB team had everything they needed, and on a larger scale than any other computer chess system today. The fact that DB2 would be updated to DB3 if it were brought back to existence is, I believe, obvious. At that point (maybe take 6 months to a year), DB3 would be king of the CC programs, for the same reasons DB2 was IMO king of the CC programs, years ago. And for exactly the same reasons: 1) Unmatched hardware, giving it unmatched speed and depth of search. 2) The resources and the team to give it whatever it needs in the way of software and hardware updates to keep it ever stronger than it's competitors. This kind of logic seems very hard to deny. Arguing the strength of DB against today's programs is irrelevant. If DB were to come back, it would be another generational update - DB3. Important to recall that FPGA boards (like what Brutus uses), were already designed into DB2, even though they were never used. For all these reasons, IMO DB3 would indeed be a holy terror, today, and soon, recognized by all as the strongest program ever to run. David (Now I'll put the pipe back in the pipe dream holder.)
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.