Author: Slater Wold
Date: 15:11:31 07/26/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 26, 2003 at 17:22:02, Russell Reagan wrote: >On July 26, 2003 at 16:25:37, O. Veli wrote: > >>Since it is hardware, can >>we expect to be stronger than top software? > >I would expect it to be slower than top software, because cpu improvements >happen so quickly, and FPGA programming (from what I've heard) is not a simple >task. If he spends another two years working on it before releasing it (as >Slater said), just imagine how much faster the cpus will be by then. > >If you're talking about something massively parallel like Deep Blue, that is one >thing, but a single PCI card? I doubt that is going to do any better than break >even with top of the line hardware, so why bother? IBM threw so much hardware at >the problem that desktop cpu improvements wouldn't catch up for a LONG time, but >a single PCI card doesn't seem to be worth the trouble of programming the thing, >because desktop/server cpus will probably outperform it before too long. Chrilly already has a project with a university to do 100+ PCI Brutus cards. It's hard to 'see' what your HW is doing, although Chrilly and Hsu had/have educated guesses. Chrilly's latest 'guess' was 3M nps. Junior & Fritz get more than that on pretty standard PCs nowadays. Even Crafty could get that nowadays. I truly believe that Brutus' eval is not as complex or as refined as *any* of those. But the same technology that makes CPUs faster, make FPGAs bigger & faster too.
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.