Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:29:29 10/24/05
Go up one level in this thread
On October 23, 2005 at 21:07:43, Uri Blass wrote: >On October 23, 2005 at 15:03:00, James Swafford wrote: > >>On October 22, 2005 at 23:47:45, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On October 22, 2005 at 22:16:17, James Swafford wrote: >>> >>>>On October 22, 2005 at 14:45:16, Drexel,Michael wrote: >>>> >>>>>On October 21, 2005 at 14:48:36, James Swafford wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On October 21, 2005 at 14:39:07, Ryan B. wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On October 21, 2005 at 13:43:40, Charles Roberson wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Make your predictions on placement for all programs. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Also, make your prediction for biggest upset. >>>>>>>> There's always an upset; which will it be this time? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Sure I'll play. I think HiarcsX will shock us all and win and Fruit is come in >>>>>>>second. As for biggest upset I will go with Crafty beating Fruit. >>>>>> >>>>>>Crafty beating Fruit would not be that big of an upset, IMHO. >>>>>>Calling that a huge upset implies Crafty is *significantly* weaker, >>>>>>and I don't believe that. >>>>>> >>>>>>-- >>>>>>James >>>>> >>>>>Well, if about 200 rating points is not significant, what is significant for >>>>>you?? >>>>>Topalov even thinks 60 points is a "different class altogether". >>>>>Not that I agree with him. >>>> >>>>200 points is significant, if that is true. >>>>Where do you get 200 points difference? >>>> >>>>-- >>>>James >>> >>> >>>4 minutes /40 moves >>>http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/eloblitz.html >>> >>>Fruit2.2 2770 >>>Crafty Cito1.2 2557 >>> >>>This is without the original opening books but I do not see a reason to assume >>>the result is very different with opening book. >>> >>>Fruit performed clearly better than Crafty in WCCC inspite of clearly inferior >>>hardware so 200 elo is clearly logical. >> >>Clearly you use the word 'clearly' too much. >> >>What hardware is used to play those games? One of Crafty's strengths is >>it's scalability. If those games were played on a single processor machine, >>then the gap would be much smaller than 200 points. > >WCCC were not played on a single processor and Crafty used 8 processors against >1 processor of Fruit. > >> >>I'm convinced Fruit is better than Crafty, at least on a single processor >>box. My original point was that it isn't *so* much better than Crafty >>that Crafty beating it should be the biggest upset of the tournament. > >It is at least 200 elo better on a single processor. > >In the CCT blitz tournament Crafty used 2 processors against 1 of fruit but I >read that this was not an hardware advantage because the 1 processor of fruit >was faster. That is correct. A single AMD64 is faster in raw NPS than my dual xeon. Factor in the 30% loss to search overhead and the AMD64 is significantly faster. Not that this matters one bit. If you look at the game, you will find that Crafty reached an easily won position, but the recent king-safety changes caused it to basically self-destruct, and open up its own king position for no good reason. > >In case that Crafty use 8 processors efficiently in blitz then the difference at >blitz is probably small but it never happened in tournaments and in the WCCC >blitz tournament Crafty did not use them efficiently. Care to explain what this is based on? Crafty uses them pretty efficiently in _all_ games. The WCCC blitz event was not very fast... > >Uri
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.