Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 16:57:38 11/05/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 05, 2002 at 19:32:26, Joachim Rang wrote: >On November 05, 2002 at 11:22:49, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On November 05, 2002 at 05:39:24, Joachim Rang wrote: >> >>>On November 04, 2002 at 18:21:41, Mark Young wrote: >>> >>>>On November 04, 2002 at 11:27:44, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On November 04, 2002 at 07:34:14, Terry McCracken wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On November 04, 2002 at 06:50:05, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On November 04, 2002 at 06:22:12, Timothy J. Frohlick wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>Mr. Pichard, >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>How fast can this Dual Guillotine "execute" instructions? This will definitely >>>>>>>>"cut" the time we have to wait during analysis. Kasparov might lose his head. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>TJF >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Sorry, but I can NOT stop laughing, you are right, Mr. Kasparov might lose his >>>>>>>head with this new Dual Guilotine. Ha Ha Ha......... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Pichard. >>>>>> >>>>>>Don't "Bet" on it. >>>>> >>>>>I would agree. Speed against humans is highly over-rated, because speed against >>>>>a computer opponent is so critical. >>>> >>>>If people check the Deep Fritz Vs. GM Kramnik games most of the moves made by >>>>the program can be found very quickly using a fast 1 chip p4. These are not the >>>>only examples, so I would have to agree. >>> >>>It's not about most moves, it's about the singular ones which looses, wins or >>>holds. So I disagree. >> >>The question is, "how many of those occur in a 6 game match?" And for those >>that >>occur, "how many times does the faster hardware find the winning move, or avoid >>the losing move, when the slower hardware doesn't?" >> >>I think that the answer to that last question against humans is "very >>infrequently". >>While against a computer it is much more significant. >> >> >well, in a 6 game match, probably not more than one time, but this may decide >the whole match. > >I agree that hardware is more important in engine-engine-matches, but why not >take the chance to play on better hardware, if there is a probability that it >increases strength? > Never said "don't use this box". The original statement was "this box will be a crushing advantage" or something to that effect. It will definitely play better. But not _significantly_ better... >> >> >> >> >>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>On November 04, 2002 at 06:13:02, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>On November 04, 2002 at 03:32:11, Slater Wold wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>http://www.informationweek.com/news/IWK20021101S0042 >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Intel's Quad 2.0Ghz >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>Should be around 3M nps with Crafty. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>An intel's Dual Gallatin Xeon operating at 2.2 Ghz should be available by the >>>>>>>>>end of this month, just before the match against Kasparov.
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.