Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: I recommend two group of winners for next year !

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 11:54:17 07/13/04

Go up one level in this thread


On July 13, 2004 at 14:32:14, Sean Empey wrote:

>On July 13, 2004 at 14:16:54, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On July 13, 2004 at 14:03:14, Sean Empey wrote:
>>
>>>On July 13, 2004 at 13:40:37, steven blincoe wrote:
>>>
>>>>>Hardware is part of the program.
>>>>How would you test the strength of dedicated units when their hardware veries so
>>>>much?
>>>>
>>>>its true to some extent..sometimes i test computers with different hardware but
>>>>the resluts will generally always be true to the hardware
>>>>
>>>>the stronger the hardware used in a dedicated unit ,then the more powerful the
>>>>rating
>>>>
>>>>there will be no computer running on a Motoroloa 68000 32 bit  processor that
>>>>could lose to a computer running on an 1806 processor
>>>>no matter how powerful the code for the chess program
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>but every year it seems we have the same resulting discussions for the WCCC...
>>>>this program lost because it was not running on a dual operton..or   ..if we
>>>>used a qaud opteron we would have preformed better..etc.etc.
>>>>
>>>>Steve
>>>
>>>
>>>Yes, the discussions happen but they are IMHO, useless questions. Asking if
>>>Program A would run better on a quad is not reasonable if it is not a MP
>>>program, etc. I think people like to speculate how strong a certain program
>>>_might_ be, but their is a huge difference in MP implementations and pulling it
>>>off. If a program is not 64-bit then asking if it would have done better running
>>>on 64-bit architecture is also useless. Just my two cents.
>>>
>>>-Sean
>>
>>The problem is not only hardware.
>>Some programs were compiled by inferior compilers.
>>
>>Movei was compiled by Visual C++6 except the first round when I used a version
>>compiled by Dann Corbit but I found that there was a bug in time management with
>>ponder on and I also wanted to change other things during the tournament so I
>>used again a version that is compiled by Visual C++6 in the rest of the games.
>>
>>I was surprised to hear that Woodpusher was even compiled only by Visual C++5
>>The programmer did not buy better compiler because it was too expensive for him.
>>
>>I do not think that it is a fair advantage.
>>
>>Uri
>
>
>So now people should be forced to compile in a specified compiler? It seems to
>me people are trying to cripple other's programs so that those programs that
>aren't as strong still have a chance to win. How is that fair? I don't see how
>handicapping everything is fair.

I do not think that handicapping other is fair.
I think that the most fair situation is that the sponsor also gives the
participants the best compiler to compile their program.

Teaching a program to use a parallel search is a lot of programming effort but
compiling with a better compiler should not be a lot of effort

Uri



This page took 0.03 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.