Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 20:29:18 03/01/04
Go up one level in this thread
On March 01, 2004 at 23:09:20, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >On March 01, 2004 at 16:35:06, Matthew Hull wrote:>>>:) >> >> >>It is useful to remember that Vincent wields with his own mind the most awesome >>power on earth, a power capable of defeating the combined strength of even 512 >>processors. > >Don't worry against an old fraud like Hyatt i'll take any 1 to 10 hardware >challenges as long as i can use decent hardware. All i need is a dual opteron. > >Let Hyatt show up with any platform of his choice at world champs i'd say. > >He can only look good at paper. Committing fraud with numbers. > >I guess that's how he got professor too, using those frauded numbers. > You know, I don't know _anybody_ that is more intellectually dishonest than yourself. You make up numbers. You make up wild claims. You get challenged on them. You get proven wrong. You run and hide and come back another day hoping that the world behaves like a goose, and wakes up tomorrow forgetting everything that happened previously. It doesn't happen. Any time you want to play a match, you know where to find me (or my program). Otherwise, all your self-perpetuated fraud will fall on deaf ears. Most here have "figured that out". You make statements based on numbers, without knowing what the numbers mean. You make unsound assumptions based on nothing but unsound personal opinion. You get called on them by most everyone here. And how do you respond? More "run and hide" and then back you come another day, with your marvelous analytical skills. I could list your transgressions for hours, were I interested. For example, when you first started on parallel search, you started with (a) no way you can get a speedup near 2.0 with two processors with Cray Blitz. A few months later, you were back with (b) I can "proof" that an average speedup of > 2.0 as produced by Diep is perfectly Ok. Followed later by (c) "I had a bug", followed later by (d) CB's speedups are too good; followed by (e) "Crafty on my dual only gets a speedup of 1.0, and I can proof it" yet several of us shot it down royally. Followed by null-move makes parallel search _way_ worse to get good speedup on than when you did Cray Blitz, followed by a test by both GCP and myself using my quad xeons, which showed that "way worse" was actually a factor of .1 worse. Speedup dropping from 3.1 with no null move R=2, to 3.0 with null-move R=2-3 as I use. The list goes on. Now you use the term "unified cache" as though it is something new. Here is a big clue for you. Every pentium produced since the pentium pro has had a "unified L2 cache". You really are a hopeless, inept, unscientific academic wannabe. If you want to see fraud, just find the nearest mirror and look hard...
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.