Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:21:11 11/09/98
Go up one level in this thread
On November 09, 1998 at 17:48:16, blass uri wrote: > >On November 09, 1998 at 16:46:54, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On November 09, 1998 at 13:46:58, Ed Schröder wrote: >> >>>>I *know* I don't write that confusing. What I said was this: DT had lots >>>>of *known* design weaknesses in the chess-specific hardware, from the evaluation >>>>to the search itself, and yet it rolled over every program around, from the >>>>micros right on up to the supercomputers, *in spite of* those substantial >>>>weaknesses. The hardware was redesigned at least twice in a major way, from >>>>the late "deep thought" hardware to Deep Blue I, to the chip used in the last >>>>match (I'll refer to it as DB II). >>> >>>>I brought this up because *you* were mixing micros of today with deep thought >>>>of 7-8 years ago. From experience, Cray Blitz of today still outplays any >>>>micro I know of, >>> >>>Can you post the CB games then? >>> >>>Or at least give some results? >> >>I didn't save the game... I published them in r.g.c about 4 years ago... about >>50 games vs genius at various handicaps... IE at the time, the machine I was >>using was a C90 with 16 processors. My handicapping had cray blitz using one >>cpu, one second per move... and I tried genius at 5 secs/move... that was an >>80X handicap when you factor 5:1 plus the 15 missing cpus. > >You assume that the speed is linear in the number of cpus. >Is it the case? difficult question to answer in the question of CB. with 16 cpus, it produces speedups of 12X... I have run on 32, but not enough to produce enough data to say definitely how much faster. But it is fast as hell... > > > This was a total >>blowout. CB didn't lose a single game and most were simple tactical blowouts >>that lasted less than 30 moves. (Note: genius on a 486/66 and then 486/100 >>later). > >what is the ratio of speed between 486/100 and the latest pentium? maybe a factor of 8... > >What is the rating of this old Genius(is it in the ssdf list) at that point in time it was on *top* of the SSDF and had been for several years I believe.. > > > I ran genius up to 30 seconds per move and it started scoring about >>one of every 10-15 games. When I gave it a minute, still with cb at 1 cpu >>and 1 processor, the match became more interesting... CB was still winnint >>3 of every 4 or 5 games... but I didn't play many at this time control as it >>was slow and cray time was not easy to get. > >60*16=960 so it is at least some hundreds times better than OldGenius. > >Is it only because of a better hardware or also because of a better program? > >Uri I don't know how to answer that. CB was about as "smart" as the current Crafty... only the search was on steroids... Speed was definitely important as I had spent years getting the parallel search optimized...
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.