Author: Keith Evans
Date: 10:56:29 04/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
On April 10, 2003 at 13:42:09, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On April 10, 2003 at 13:36:55, Keith Evans wrote: > >>On April 10, 2003 at 12:44:46, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>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 >> >> >>Vincent, >> >>You're using a 500 CPU system for performance, and you're worried about the cost >>of an SDRAM DIMM (or whatever type of memory) in a different thread... >> >>Wow! > >my thing is in software not hardware keith. If people buy my thing it is a >software cdrom. price matters there too if it is not too much. I can't ask $1000 >for my thing if it is software. $250 would be outrageous too. > >But when we talk about hardware that everyone can buy, then price matters of >course. > >there is a big diff between software and hardware, and that's price. > >Whether i run on a dual K7 or a 500 processor, it is the same program. 500 >processors simply speed you up more than 2. that's all. Well if you can keep the same executible then it could be a selling point. I was assuming that the 500 processor version would have some differences. Is the 500 processor box running Windows? Linux?
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.