Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: More Adam vs Hydra Hype

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 09:31:03 05/26/05

Go up one level in this thread


On May 26, 2005 at 12:17:11, Uri Blass wrote:

>On May 26, 2005 at 12:02:37, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>
>>On May 26, 2005 at 10:40:04, Darrel Briley wrote:
>>
>>>There's another article on Chessbase site today concerning the upcoming match.
>>>
>>>http://www.chessbase.com/newsdetail.asp?newsid=2412
>>>
>>>It's interesting to note that despite the upcoming Adams/Leko match beginning
>>>June 2nd (a rapid match), the match with Hydra is getting all the press.  Some
>>>highlights from the article:
>>>
>>>...processing power equivalent to more than 200 standard PCs
>>
>>32 pc processors
>>
>>Please prove me that such a simple program like hydra cannot search with
>>millions of nodes a second single cpu in software. Even crafty can get what is
>>it 2+ million nps at an opteron or so?
>
>How do you know if hydra is simple or not simple?

It is not easy to make a simple software program in hardware.
Nor is it easy to tune all that.

But yes it has a very limited set of knowledge, Chrilly never made a secret out
of that. In fact in the games it plays you can easily deduce this if you study
them.

>
>If you want to compare between programs I think that it may be more interesting
>if you compare Crafty with other free source code programs like
>Fruit-Toga or Glaurung.

Fruit nor Crafty are playing at a 32 processor machine against Adams, so
definitely Hydra is more interesting to speak about and whether Adams will be
motivated to play well.

I know how hard it is for persons with your personality to be able to realize
with common sense the imporance of a game you practice at home against Fruit
versus the importance of a match Adams versus Hydra, but take it from me that
Hydra versus Adams for mankind minus 1 is more interesting to speak about.

Comparing fruit/crafty with hydra is an insult for Hydra nevertheless.

It's far better and especially more agressive tuned that hydra.

Vincent

>Uri
>
>>
>>Additional it's without hashtables last X plies and very poor move ordering
>>techniques in hardware (it does have killer moves as opposed to deep blue, so
>>it's *far more* efficient in hardware than DB was at its days).
>>
>>>...64-way cluster computer
>>
>>32 processors used though. I'm sure it would be more effective when run in
>>software. However would you have written this posting then?
>>
>>>...16 nodes of four computers, with each node boasting 32GB of memory
>>
>>Not used last 6 plies or so in search.
>>
>>>...Each computer has an Intel Xeon 3.06 Ghz.
>>
>>Irrelevant, search is in hardware.
>>
>>>...It has never been beaten by a human.
>>
>>Oh there is *many* programs that can say that with respect to official matches.
>>
>>>And some of the expamples provided to demonstrate Hydra's power:
>>
>>>-1 second to analyse 200 million chess moves and chose the best one. This
>>
>>Please note the node count of hydra is just guessed. There is not hardware
>>beancounter. So he's just doing software nodes times some optimistic number of
>>nodes a search which is guessed. And no doubt a factor 3 to 4 too much.
>>
>>>includes projecting the game 18-40 moves head (6 more than Deep Blue)
>>
>>Deep blue searched 10 ply search depth in crucial positions and up to 12 ply
>>deep in other positions. Hydra will get double that depth. So that's 10 moves
>>look ahead.
>>
>>>-1 millisecond to calculate all possible angles and determine whether Luis
>>>Garcia’s shot was a goal in the Champions League semi-final
>>>-1 second to match a finger print to any person within the UK
>>
>>No way, in any arabic state they're not clever enough to develop such techniques
>>themselves :)
>>
>>>-Less than 1.5 minutes to match a finger print to any person in the world
>>>-Approximately five minutes to calculate every prime number between 1 and 1x1051
>>>(a sexdicillion)
>>
>>Hello, i can calculate prime numbers up to 10 million digits at my pc nearly,
>>though not within 5 minutes.
>>
>>A prime number of 1051 digits is really peanuts to calculate within seconds.
>>
>>I'll have to refer to some other software mine there.
>>
>>Vincent



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.