Author: Bob Durrett
Date: 18:15:10 02/20/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 19, 2004 at 13:18:03, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On February 18, 2004 at 16:43:23, Jorge Pichard wrote: > >>On February 18, 2004 at 16:00:38, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On February 18, 2004 at 15:43:17, Aaron Gordon wrote: >>> >>>>On February 18, 2004 at 15:34:32, Mark Young wrote: >>>> >>>>>Hydra gets suckerd by some nice anti-computer play! A very ugly game by Hydra. >>>> >>>>Doubt Hyatt would want to work with the Hydra programmer. I believe it was >>>>Donninger (lead programmer?) who said, "The only good American is a dead one" or >>>>something to that effect. >>> >>> >>>Correct. But then, I'm not sure why the subject "Hydra needs hyatt on team" >>>came up either. I'd suspect they can do just fine without me. I'm not really >>>interested in looking at hardware solutions when we have such good >>>general-purpose "solutions" like the opteron around. :) >> >> >>I was just thinking about the comparison of two of those Hydra cards with a Dual >>Opteron 248 or 4 Cards versus Quad Opteron. I believe that Crafty using the same >>Quad Opteron that you previously use, is much faster than Hydra with 4 FPGA >>cards :-) >> >>Jorge > > >It is hard to say. I know how fast I was running. But their parallel >implementation has some issues to deal with that I get to ignore, and some of >those issues are pretty important, such as accessing the hash table, >communicating with other processors, etc. Fast on a SMP box, not so fast on a >box that depends on the PCI bus to talk to the FPGA cards... Is there no alternative to a PCI bus? If not, maybe we need to invent something. Bob D.
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.