Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 17:43:02 12/10/98
Go up one level in this thread
On December 09, 1998 at 15:07:05, John Coffey wrote: >On December 09, 1998 at 06:36:02, Mark Young wrote: > >>Many of use have played over the games of Deep Blue Vs GM Kasparov , and Rebel >>10 Vs GM Anand. >> >>My question is what do you think would be the stronger chess program, and by how >>much: >> >>Deep Blue, or Rebel 10 (K6 450Mhz) * 1000 > > >My understanding is the Deep Blue is designed to be fast as possible, so we can >assume that its evaluation function is relatively simple. But slower programs >often have to have a more complex evaluation to make up for the lack of speed. > this is a bad assumption. and also a misunderstanding. First, the second part of the above. Slow programs don't have big evaluations to offset their slower speed. They are slower *because* of their evaluations. You have it backward. For DB, the equation is different, because they have special-purpose hardware and can do anything they want in their eval without worrying about speed, because hardware can do many things in parallel, which means you get to do those things at no cost in speed... That is the purpose of the DB development, to push everything into hardware where they can do whatever they want without any regard to speed, because it doesn't slow them down any.. >If by some miracle Rebel 10 could examine as many nodes as Deep Blue then it >would probably win. This is not ridiculous nor impossible nor would it take >a hundred years to happen (maybe.) If you look at how computers have gotten >a thousand times or more faster over the last 20 years, then is it possible >that they could get a thousand times faster over the next 20 years? We don't >know the answer yet because we don't know if we will hit theoretical limits. If >we do hit such limits then will we be able to find ways around them? the above is founded on a false assumption, that DB's evaluation is much simpler than Rebel 10's. In fact, the opposite is true... DB does perhaps 10X as much evaluation, maybe far more, at each position... But they get to do this with no slowdown... > >Hang onto that Rebel 10 program. I will be curious just how it plays 20 years >from now. I wonder if we will still have DOS 20 years from now? (Or Windows?) >Both will probably require some sort of emulator to run. > >John Coffey
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.