Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:37:15 01/01/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 01, 2006 at 11:33:41, Otello Gnaramori wrote: >On January 01, 2006 at 06:57:06, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On January 01, 2006 at 05:17:34, Otello Gnaramori wrote: >> >>>On December 31, 2005 at 16:28:52, Zappa wrote: >>> >>>>To paraphrase Stuart's post, "Rybka beats HIARCS because it is better". Looks >>>>like you are one of those people that is impressed by long sentences, no matter >>>>how inane the actual content . . . >>>> >>>>anthony >>> >>>Why inane ? Probably the Stuart's sentence was a bit ironic but it reflects >>>quite good the actual situation...if you don't agree feeel free to express your >>>opinion without personal attacks, or are just a bit envy of personal success of >>>Vasik ? I can also add that in my personal opinion to use a lot of hardware >>>power like Zappa in Paderborn is not sufficient to win. >>> >>>w.b.r. >>>Otello >> >>Of course using a lot of hardware is not enough. >>You need the hardware to work and this is the hardest part. >> >>If you solve the last problem and you have a program that is as strong as zappa >>then you have good chances to win but you have also good chances not to solve >>the last problem as happened to zappa based on anthony's reports. >> >>Uri > >I agree that may have been some problem with Zappa hardware...but Rybka also >prevail on single CPU against engines running on quads ... so the hardware power >has a relative importance i.m.h.o. > >w.b.r. >Otello I did not claim that 4 processors against one could be enough for zappa but zappa had lot more than 4 processors and the problem is only that the hardware did not work. 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.