Author: Eugene Nalimov
Date: 12:43:42 03/27/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 27, 1999 at 12:45:05, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >On March 27, 1999 at 03:55:25, blass uri wrote: > >>It is not fair because part of the effort in doing the program crafty is by >>doing it a parallel machine. >>I believe that Bob could do in the same time a better program if he did not >>waste time for doing a SMP program. > >If someone wants to compare Crafty and Fritz I think it would be fair to compare >them on uniform high-end (single-processor) hardware, since they are both >designed to work on that hardware. > >If one of them would only run on a 286, I don't think it would be fair to make >them both run on a 286. > >But multiprocessor machines are still a super- high-end thing so it's probably >not fair to say: Here is the machine, it has 4 processors, feel free to use >them in this match. Oh, what did you say Fritz, you can't use 4 processors, you >can only use one? Well, that's too bad for you. You might as well put them >both on an Alpha and expect Fritz to use an emulator. > >In a few years, maybe, because everyone will have a multiprocessor machine, but >of course everyone will be multiprocessor then. > >Bob's put time in being SMP, sure, but I think he supports single-processor >machines and runs well on them. > >bruce Bob spent his time working on SMP. Also, he deliberatly lost some performance by using C instead of assembly. Author of Fritz decided not to include SMP code, as well as write his program on assembly to squize last pieces of performance. By using single-CPU x86-compatible machine you favor Fritz - he will be running on the best possible platform. Maybe it's better to put some dollar limit - e.g. "on a machines that cost not more than $7,500". Eugene
This page took 0.01 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.