Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 09:40:34 04/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 10, 2003 at 12:05:35, Jonas Bylund wrote: >On April 10, 2003 at 12:02:05, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On April 10, 2003 at 11:37:50, Jonas Bylund wrote: >> >>>On April 10, 2003 at 10:27:57, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On April 10, 2003 at 10:11:21, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >>>> >>>>>On April 10, 2003 at 09:25:09, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On April 10, 2003 at 09:20:15, ERIQ wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>These are all great goals, but I like this order better. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>* A Linux/bsd version of Chess Tiger w/ great gui ie. Eboard or better. >>>>>>>* A native ARM version of Chess Tiger for Palm >>>>>>>* Chess Tiger 16 >>>>>>>* ...and a few more projects that I prefer to keep secret >>>>>>> >>>>>>>basis for order is: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>1.I will have a freebsd system running in about two week hopefully (just waiting >>>>>>>on hardware to arrive) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>2.As soon as I could buy a new sony palm I will. So I can win a game from time >>>>>>>to time :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>3.And ct16 should be last because ct15 is already too strong!! whether it's >>>>>>>first or last on that silly list that everone likes, I can't beat it on a 486 >>>>>>>comp. And yes I've tried shamlessly >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Just my two cents. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Sign, >>>>>>> Eriq >>>>>> >>>>>>a dual version of CT15 would kick more butt than ct16 or working at the unknown >>>>>>freebsd. note that freebsd allows multiprocessing but multithreading at it i >>>>>>cannot advice. >>>>> >>>>>I think a dual version of CTX would be great! maybe we should have a hands up >>>>>here, to see if we can influence the order of things ;) (note: people with dual >>>>>processor systems votes count double, ok maybe only 1.7 :) >>>>> >>>>>Jonas >>>> >>>>Some people are simply too lazy or have too much bugs in their software to get >>>>stuff parallel well to work. >>>> >>>>It will be always like that. >>> >>>Well i don't know where that came from, but i am quite sure that an accomplished >>>programmer like CT would have no problems making Tiger SMP. >> >>in which case he is just plain lazy now. > >I think the fact that he have expressed other priorities than SMP is more >accurate than your guessing, maybe you are too lazy to ask him yourself? No my viewpoint is that tiger is a too buggy engine to get SMP easily, but we will never find out, as he's too lazy to even try that. No doubts that you can work forever at forward pruning and such stuff. With or without SMP. But if you first get a near to factor 2 faster with SMP with some effort then you have your hands free too, to toy there. You do not make up for a factor 2 simply with the same engine. Nowadays new chips have SMT too. Within a few years that will work better on coming cpu's than it does now. perhaps amd even will get it one day. that would be awesome. But Tiger will be still single cpu then most likely, which is a shame for such a good engine. >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.