Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 11:21:17 01/23/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 23, 2003 at 10:55:10, Uri Blass wrote: >On January 23, 2003 at 10:32:10, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On January 23, 2003 at 04:30:50, Daniel Clausen wrote: >> >>>On January 23, 2003 at 04:19:47, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>> >>>>On January 23, 2003 at 00:18:54, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>>On January 23, 2003 at 00:04:18, Chris Kantack wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>I have seen the rules and other "tidbits" of the upcoming Kasparov vs. Deep >>>>>>Junior match. There's even a site where you can bet on the outcome. But what >>>>>>of the hardware? 2, 4, 6, 8 processors or more???? Processor speed?? >>>>>> >>>>>>Any official info yet? >>>>>> >>>>>>Thanks, >>>>>>Chris Kantack >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>The only viable choices from the Intel world are a dual xeon 2.8, or a quad >>>>>xeon 2.0... I don't think anything else comes close. There might be some >>>>>quad 2.8's in the hands of a select few, but they will probably be hard to >>>>>get access to. >>>> >>>> >>>>It would be great if Amir gets his hands on a Quad 2.8, but a Quad 2.0 would do >>>>just fine. Why they have not posted any information on the hardware to be used >>>>will be simply a surprise :) >>>> >>>>Pichard >>> >>> >>>It's interesting to see that people are so focused on the hardware used in these >>>matches. Of course hardware is important, but I guess that most people (after >>>some thought ;) that the actual hardware used in a comp-human match is a bit >>>less important as opposed to a comp-comp match. >> >>absolutely correct. The influence of going 2x faster against a human is >>minimal. If >>it is all about search, the human will lose no matter what. But it isn't, yet, >>all about >>search, if all you do is search deeply to find lost positions. :) > >If you find lost positions by search then you can avoid the losing blunder. > >I do not think that we have data to say that the influence of being twice faster >is minimal. I have _lots_ of data. I have run on ICC for years now, at in blitz games, switching to 2x faster hardware doesn't have an appreciable effect on playing humans... > >games on ICC when Crafty is twice slower do not prove much because humans lose >most of the games in any case. Not really. There are a few gms that get a significant number of draws to go along with their losses, and they even win a game here and there. Going from 4x400 to 4x550 to 4x700 and even 2x2800 does not make that much of a difference. I have even changed from 4x550 to 2x2800 and then later asked them if they could tell any difference. The answer was "no". > >The question is not about the influence of being twice faster against weaker >opponents who lose most of the games but the influence of being twice faster >against equal opponents. > >Uri
This page took 0.01 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.