Author: Mark Rawlings
Date: 19:19:42 03/22/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 22, 1999 at 08:14:06, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On March 21, 1999 at 15:38:29, Mark Young wrote: > >>On March 21, 1999 at 15:15:34, Paulo Soares wrote: >> >>>On March 21, 1999 at 14:03:18, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On March 21, 1999 at 13:15:23, Paulo Soares wrote: >>>> >>>>> In 1989 the HD approximately had a capacity of storage of 30 Mb. >>>>>Today they have approximately 8Gyb, or either, approximately 250x more >>>>>capacity of storage of data. In year 2010: >>>>> 8*250=2Terabytes >>>>>This not influence in Ed' tournamant(computerxcomputer) but >>>>>what the influence in computer x humans games in the openings, >>>>>endgames(tablebases) and midlegames? >>>>> >>>>>Best regards, >>>>>Paulo Soares,from Brazil. >>>> >>>> >>>>things haven't improved _that_ much. In 1985 we bought a machine with a >>>>couple of 1 gig disks. On the PC platform (IDE) I bought a Toshiba Notebook >>>>in 1986 with a 40 mb disk, and had SCSI been available back then (on a PC) >>>>they could have had 1 gig disks... >>>> >>>>Today's disks are at 50 gigs max. with 20-30 gigs being pretty common (I just >>>>bought a 17 gig disk for 300 bucks at Comp USA (IDE)). So in 10 years we have >>>>increased by maybe a factor of 50, which is more realistic... >>> >>> >>>Robert, >>> Then we will have HDs with approach capacity >>>of 50x20=1Terabyte. You know much about the endgames >>>tablebases, what you find that would happen? 7 pieces, >>>9 pieces, in the endgames tablebases? >>> >>>Best regards, >>>Paulo Soares >> >>I'm not an EGTB expert, but I see how much space it takes jumping from just 4 to >>5 pieces tables. That make me think even with a Terabyte drive, 7 and for sure 9 >>pieces tables will still be out of reach. Bob, with todays fastest super >>computer. How long would to take to make a 9 pieces EGTB? Any Idea. > > >yes, and I don't want to think about it. :) > >IE figure a week to do krpkr + promotions. the 6 piece files are 64 times >bigger, but _far_ bigger in terms of time, because we have to iterate for >each mate-in-N. And no one knows what kind of mate-in-N thing we might see >with 6 or 7 piece files. On a good supercomputer, Lewis Stiller did a few >6 piece endings, but they were pawnless I think, which reduces the mate-in-N >distance to something close to manageable. But a real 6 piece file with one >(or more) pawns might take a year at present, and need a _huge_ amount of real >memory to prevent that from paging into 10 years. > >We're a ways away... Lewis Stiller computed 41 6-piece tablebases (all pawnless) according to his thesis. The longest mate was in 243 for a KRNknn ending! The FEN is: 6N1/5KR1/2n5/8/8/8/2n5/1k6 w - - 0 0 (Key move is Ke6, which Fritz 5 locks onto almost immediately!) Mark
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.