Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 22:06:34 11/19/02

Go up one level in this thread

On November 19, 2002 at 23:54:40, Dan Andersson wrote: >I don't see how you can show that by comparing NPS of two wildly different >programs. Suppose one of them has a more efficient evaluation function. There is >no basis for comparision. Other than that they both play chess :) > >MvH Dan Andersson Actually, at least for the case of Crafty and Yace, there is a good basis for comparison. They are relatively equal in playing strength. So any advantage in bitboards over arrays or vice-versa would seem to be _very_ minimal, which is what I have generally claimed for 32 bit machines... Not a great comparison, of course, but it at least suggests that on the PC, there isn't much difference. Or take fritz vs a commercial program. Fritz supposedly is now a bitmap program. Other commercial programs are not. Yet there seems to be little difference in overall strength. Which lends more evidence to my "bitmaps are a break-even affair on 32 bit machines" conclusion... Of course, a "few" won't let such real data prevent them from producing heaps of disinformation...

- Re: significant math
**Dan Andersson***01:00:20 11/20/02*- Re: significant math
**Robert Hyatt***07:59:33 11/20/02*- Re: significant math
**Dan Andersson***13:52:11 11/20/02*- Re: significant math
**Robert Hyatt***15:34:35 11/20/02* - Re: significant math
**Sune Fischer***14:37:08 11/20/02*- Re: significant math
**Vincent Diepeveen***21:00:13 11/21/02*- Re: significant math
**Sune Fischer***03:24:41 11/22/02*

- Re: significant math

- Re: significant math

- Re: significant math

- Re: significant math

- Re: significant math
- Re: significant math
**Uri Blass***22:50:38 11/19/02*- Re: significant math
**Robert Hyatt***08:01:29 11/20/02* - Re: significant math
**Uri Blass***22:52:20 11/19/02*

- Re: significant math

This page took 0.03 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.