Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 22:31:46 10/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 10, 2003 at 18:30:18, K. Burcham wrote:
>
>
>I also believe mhz makes a big difference in game results and analysis.
>
>I remember a reply to one of my posts regarding SSDF hardware upgrades. I
>thought it was important for SSDF to upgrade for more accurate test results. At
>the time I think SSDF was using 450 mhz AMD.
>
>Have you had a change of heart about the importance of mhz. Does size make a
>difference to you?
I don't understand why you are asking those questions.
We are in a -somewhat- scientific field, and so some kind of pseudo scientific
approach is welcome.
Mentionning some data about an experiment you have made is better than not
mentionning.
That's my point here.
>I will always post with MHZ and program.
That's great.
>I think Dan's idea
>of MHZ in profile is good.
>
>here is the post I am refering to:
This message has nothing to do about the point in question today.
Christophe
>Christophe Theron on May 30, 2001 at 22:48:09
>
>
>I'm happy to learn that the computer I work on everyday is antique.
>
>If there is a difference in elo increase between programs, it is likely to be
>under the error margin you can expect from 200 games, so you won't be able to
>detect it by comparing the results on 450MHz computers with the results on
>1500MHz.
>
>If you really believe that the SSDF is way off by testing on 450MHz computers,
>you are living with illusions.
>
>But they know that there are people like you, so they're going to update their
>hardware soon.
>
>That won't change a thing, except that next year you are going to complain about
>those antique 1500MHz computers.
>
>Meanwhile, a year without barking at the SSDF hardware level is something we are
>all going to enjoy.
>
>
>
>Christophe
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.