Author: ALI MIRAFZALI
Date: 06:59:40 09/21/05
Go up one level in this thread
On September 20, 2005 at 13:29:20, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On September 20, 2005 at 09:31:51, ALI MIRAFZALI wrote: > >>On September 19, 2005 at 10:30:34, Joseph Tadeusz wrote: >> >>>On http://wbec-ridderkerk.nl/ you can see GNUchess 4.11 on a modern PC has a >>>rating of 2147. >>> >>>On http://perso.wanadoo.fr/ct_chess/faq.html (bottom) you can see CT15 on Palm >>>Tungsten-E has rating of 2147 (SSDF). >>> >>>Chess Tiger clearly has a higher intelligence per node. >>> >>>So what's the big deal? >>The big deal is Hyatts claim that 1000X difference in NPS cannot be overcome >>;AND most importantly the fact that a lot of DeepBlue supporters base their >>arguments on Deep Blue's Strength based om NPS > >That's a crock. I base my arguments on three important points that really can >not be refuted: > >(1) deep thought (deep blue's direct predecessor) was the first (and only) >program to produce a 2650+ performance result, playing games only against GM >players, at 40 moves in 2 hours only for the time control. It did this over 25 >consecutive games (intervening games could not be ignored if the result was >bad). No other program has yet accomplished this. > >(2) deep thought won every computer chess event it participated in, running at >about 2M nodes per second, from 1987 to 1994, losing just one event (hong kong) >due to a communication failure that resulting in it moving too quickly after the >re-start and losing to fritz. > >(3) deep blue was 100x faster than deep thought 2, with more chess knowledge >than deep thought 2, and this is the box that beat Kasparov in a 6 game match. > >It is certainly possible that todays fastest computers, running today's best >commercial programs, are playing at an equal level when compared to deep blue, >although the Kramnik/etc matches were played at faster time controls generally, >than 40 moves in 2 hours. But at best the best micros of today are maybe as >strong as the 1997 deep blue system. Far from being far superior to it. Based >solely on the observations given above. Each of which can easily be verified >multiple ways... Some points 1.I can see like most people in this forum you have not done the real interesting experiments.Which is THIS.ANALIZING deepthought games with Commercial engines .Every Game even the wins has on the average 4 big mistakes. 2.Deep Blue is essentially a souped up version of Deepthought. 3.The Kramnik/Kasparov matches were at 40 moves in 2 hours.
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.