Author: Joachim Rang
Date: 06:00:58 02/17/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 17, 2004 at 08:41:16, Bob Durrett wrote: > > >The fact is that Hydra whipped a bunch of conventional chess computers at >Paderborn. That fact is indisputable. > >How??? > >How could Hydra, chugging away at the clock rate of a slow snail, win against >the high-nps conventional machines? > >They say "nps isn't everything." But could the truth be "nps isn't anything"? > >Maybe conventional wisdom ["The Earth is flat"] isn't right after all. > >Does anybody understand what happened? I feel that the results were monumental! > >Bob D. well Bob, it seems you should first read some more technical information about Brutus/Hydra. Hydra calculated in Paderborn some millions nps with 8 processors and 8 cards. So the speed was okay I'd say ;-) It's nothing phenomenal that Hydra performed so good, since the benefits of a hardware-approach are well known - as the disadvantages. Nevertheless Chrilly and his team did a good job but nothing monumentally...
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.