Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: To Robert Hyatt

Author: Majd Al-Ansari

Date: 00:06:43 08/16/05

Go up one level in this thread


Hi Bob,

I have been following your implementation of new hardware with great interest.
I think it is great to push software to match the leading hardware.  I was
wondering what you think of Hydra's way of using programmable cards as a
scalable way to increase hardware power.  Is it more cost effective?  Or do you
think that as more and more cores get added to CPU's that is a better
alternative.  While I am not a programmer, I was especially interested about
Hydra's claim that adding "chess knowledge" does not reduce the programs speed.
I think with every engine you can get reach certain positionss where even the
best engine can play moves that even a 1800 player can do better.  I have one
position in mind where Shredder 9 UCI will resign as black in an absolutely
drawn endgame (gives evaluation +9.8) and I am sure you have similar experiences
with certain positions.  Ofcourse the programmers are aware of these things but
will not add this chess knowledge because it will reduce the strength of the
program in other areas.  If Hydra's claim of being able to add chess knowledge
without reducing speed is true, then isn't that the way to go?  Thanks



On August 15, 2005 at 11:03:54, Keith Hyams wrote:

>Does anyone know if/where a list of the hardware that the programs are using has
>been published? Details of version numbers would be interesting too.
>                        Regards
>                            Keith



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.