Author: Anthony Cozzie
Date: 06:03:45 12/23/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 23, 2003 at 06:39:22, Peter Berger wrote: >On December 22, 2003 at 22:59:01, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>>To go back to the discussion that started this: it looks as if Crafty on 10 >>>times faster hardware is indeed very competitive with a top commercial engine, >>>but not necessarily the overwhelming favourite. >> >>That was my original point in response to Omid's rather crass "if they >>thought they had any chance of winning, they would have come..." statement. >> >>And the main point is that I probably would not have been "just" 10X >>faster. :) >> > >Interesting. I think this was not challenged in discussion partly because there >was no clear idea how much faster Crafty would have to be. > >Let's say you had planned to show up with 10X faster hardware with Crafty at >WCCC2003. > >This is what Junior used there: >http://www.chess.at/turniere/turniere2003/chess003/video/int2.wmv > >Intel 4* 2.8 GHz > >What would you have got for Crafty? > >Peter It would probably not be too hard to get a 64-way Itanium2 box. I know Vincent was "practicing" on one of those :) I think that'd be about 60M nps for crafty. I'm not sure how much stronger it would be, though. I think evaluation is much more important than search depth once you start hitting 14-15 ply. anthony
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.