Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:01:24 02/17/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 17, 2004 at 12:25:18, Anson T J wrote: >On February 17, 2004 at 10:30:32, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>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? >> >> >>I don't understand the question. Hydra probably hit speeds of 15-20M nodes per >>second. How is that "a slow snail"??? >> >>It was the fastest thing playing there by a factor of at least 4x... > >I think he is talking about the clock speed of the boards. I don't know the >clock speed of the boards but I would imagine they are slower than GHz. Yes, but who cares? It is the NPS that determines how fast a chess program searches, and their NPS was above anything else by a big margin. Would it matter if someone showed up with an Indy car that ran 300mph but with an engine that only turned 4,800 RPM? Would that be considered "slow" since the rest are hitting 10K+ on their tachs??? >> >> >> >>> >>>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.
This page took 0.01 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.