Author: Alvaro Jose Povoa Cardoso
Date: 11:43:28 02/07/06
Go up one level in this thread
On February 07, 2006 at 04:25:13, Tord Romstad wrote: >On February 07, 2006 at 04:06:14, Ryan B. wrote: > >>On February 07, 2006 at 03:21:09, Tord Romstad wrote: >> >>>On February 06, 2006 at 21:47:09, Ryan B. wrote: >>> >>>>Rather it is to hide extra hidden search or for marketing propaganda >>> >>>Marketing propaganda? What does the nodes/second ratio have to do >>>with marketing? >>> >> >>Many people seem to think that low nps means more chess knowledge in the eval. > >OK, if you say so. I thought most ordinary users were more likely to be >impressed by *high* nodes/second counts, but I could be wrong. I think both cases could impress users. A very high nps denotes speed and tatical strength. An extremely "true" low nps denotes clever algorithms and a possible revolutionary way of dealing with computer chess. Alvaro > >>Sorry if the word "manipulates" sounded negative. I feel Vas does hide things >>in what Rybka does but I do not mean for it to sound negative, it is his right >>to do so. If you know of a similar word that does not imply anything negative >>please let me know and I will use the better word in the future. I don't wish >>to offend anyone with my posts. > >I know, and I didn't mean to imply that you did. :-) > >Instead of looking for a better word, I think I would just say that the >N/s count doesn't really say anything about the strength or the knowledge >in a chess engine, and that comparisons between N/s counts in different >engines are meaningless. > >Tord
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.