Author: Jonas Cohonas
Date: 09:53:13 02/16/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 16, 2003 at 09:16:54, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On February 16, 2003 at 08:19:08, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On February 16, 2003 at 07:23:29, Frank Phillips wrote: >> >>>On February 16, 2003 at 07:10:34, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>> >>>> >>>>The gap between the best programs and part of the free programs programs is more >>>>than 500 elo on equal hardware. >>> >>>Can you point to the data source that supports this claim. > 500 seems a bigger >>>gap that indicated by SDF and ICC. >> >>There are a lot of rating list >>The gap between the best free programs and another part of the free programs is >>also more than 500 elo. >> >> >>Look at the following list >> >>http://www.digichess.gr/infiniteloop/ratings/rapid_rating_il2r.txt >> >>Crafty17.9 2672 >>Movei0.07a 2052 >> >> >>Movei0.07a(my old program) is not extremely weak and it is >>more closer to the top than to the bottom that is >>LaMoSca 0.10 1183 >> >>I said that the gap between the best programs and part of te free programs is >>more than 500 elo. >>I did not talk about the best free programs. >> >>> >>>> >>>>Hardware that is 100 times faster will not be enough to compensate for that >>>>difference. >>>> >>>>We do not know what was the level of the software of deeper blue because it >>>>never played games on equal hardware. >>> >>>Why should it have to play on equal hardware? It was designed to a different >>>paradigm. >> >>If people use the speed of it as a reason to convince people that it was better >>than we need some information about it's level on equal hardware. > > >I am a science dickhead. Again: the 100x are not being used to PROVE that DB2 >was stronger. They are used to doubt the claim that DJ is stronger. Excuse me, >Uri, let's not confuse the question. > >Rolf Tueschen A real scientist would also look at the time gap between DB2 and DJ and understand that the argument goes both ways, the fact that DJ is 6 years ahead of DB2 in terms of development could bring one to doubt that such an old machine is stronger than DJ... Science is also about questioning ones own convictions, if one fail to do that then one is a fanatic. If we where to compare DB2 and DJ, then we should do it on equal terms and give DJ the same hardware or more realistic, take the DB2 97 engine and put it on same hardware as DJ ran on in the Kasparov match and then have a match, well i know who my money would be on. BTW i thought you did not use bad language?? Jonas
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.