Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:30:50 09/18/05
Go up one level in this thread
On September 18, 2005 at 07:04:36, ALI MIRAFZALI wrote: >On September 17, 2005 at 21:51:04, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On September 17, 2005 at 17:10:00, ALI MIRAFZALI wrote: >> >>>On September 17, 2005 at 13:42:07, Albert Silver wrote: >>> >>>>On September 17, 2005 at 10:04:32, ALI MIRAFZALI wrote: >>>> >>>>>Hyatt has claimed many times that a Nodes Per Second Factor of one thousand >>>>>times would not be overcome by the program with the less Nodes per second.In >>>>>this Experiment it was shown conclusively that this is false .Although I played >>>>>4 games ,I do not think the result would have been different if I had played a >>>>>hundred more.Time Control 40 MOVES IN 2 HOURS followed by sudden death in 1 >>>>>hour.Hardware: GNU CHESS 4.11 a program from 1996 ran a celeron 1.8 Gig machine >>>>>;Chess Tiger on Palm ran on the Palm Tungten E.NODES PER SECOND:ON THE >>>>>AVERAGE:CHESSTIGER ON PALM 500 per second ,GNU CHESS 4.11 500000 per second on >>>>>the celeron 1.8 Gig.1000X DIFFERENCE.Hyatt and some other people have always >>>>>argued about the supremecy of DeepBlue based on its speed.I think these days >>>>>these arguments are false;and Speed does not mean as much as it used to.Deep >>>>>blue would be crushed by todays program's.A lot of STRENGTH is EVALUATION >>>>>FUNCTION.Take a look at these games: >>>>>Match ended in 2-2 draw. >>>> >>>>The idea of testing this is certainly interesting but the conditions seem rather >>>>dubious IMHO. For one thing, 4 games really is COMPLETELY meaningless, andwith >>>>all due respect to claim you don't think the result could have been different >>>>shows how much you don't understand this. >>>> >>>>BTW, does Tiger really only get 500 nodes per second on your Palm? That seems >>>>ridiculously low. I don't have Tiger, nor a Palm for that matter, but on my Dell >>>>Pocket PC at 624MHz, I get about 50,000 nps on average for Fruit 2.1. >>>> >>>>Note that if one is to believe the results of Hiarcs site >>>>(http://www.hiarcs.com/phresults.htm), Tiger on the Palm has inordinately bad >>>>results (they claim it plays over 400 points worse than Hiarcs on identical >>>>hardware, which is HUGE), so perhaps it isn't the ideal choice. >>>> >>>> Albert >>>Yes indeed Tiger does get 500 Nps on the palm Tungsten E.Note that it is Hyatt's >>>claim that I am disproving.According to him a NPS of 1000X factor would be >>>impossible to overcome even in 4 games >> >> >>No, what you are disproving is a false statement you are making. Since I never >>said what you claim, it would be just a bit difficult to disprove it, since it >>was never said. >> >>Grow up or try again... >What??? you have made this remark many times.Of course due to the volume of >your remarks I cant pin point the exact time and day. You can't point it out because I didn't say that. Again, whenever you want to try a 1000:1 handicap match using the program of your choice vs Crafty, step right up... But none of this "lets take program X, then remove features Y and Z and use that."
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.