Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 09:44:46 04/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 10, 2003 at 12:39:59, Christophe Theron 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. > > > >Vincent I have explained that I have other priorities. > >Why should I spend time on a task that I estimate is mostly a waste of time? > >Can you mention the benefits that has brought to you the multiprocesor version >of Diep? i show up at 500 processors world champs 2003 to name one. other is that i don't need to waste my time with forward pruning because i get already a factor 2 nearly out of SMP. >Have you won any tournament thanks to it? Has it improved your image, the >perception of quality in the eye of your future customers? How much money (=fuel >to continue improving your chess engine) have you made from it? It definitely will. Noomen has brought you a few victories at quick levels. Well done Christophe. >How can you justify that it has not been an almost complete waste of time? > Christophe History will forget you. History won't forget me. You will see soon. So far SMP was just a factor 1.5 speedup for most and 1.8 to 2.0 for some. But coming years the difference will be way more. Factors 4.0 to 8.0 will not get uncommon. Just read my lips. In my case how about 500 cpus at europes fastest supercomputer for computerchess? Now *that* is a bigger sales argument than you might think Christophe. Let's not publicly discuss sales. But you know what i mean. I bet you want to exchange all those tournament victories for just one shot at the title at a world championship which simultaneously is also a shot to playing the FIDE world champ! Best regards, Vincent
This page took 0.02 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.