Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 13:58:03 05/14/99
Go up one level in this thread
On May 14, 1999 at 11:07:36, José Carlos wrote: >On May 14, 1999 at 05:24:20, Peter Hegger wrote: > >>Hello >>Let's say that today's best programs, Fritz, CM6000, junior etc.. are playing at >>the 2450 level at 40/2 when they've got hardware capable of knocking off .5M >>nps. I don't think this is too outlandish an assumption. >>If you double this speed 8 times over you arrive at 128M nps. This is in the >>same ballpark as this new proposed screamer of Hsu's which it is estimated will >>knock off 120M nps on a multi-processor platform. >>I've seen in other threads that doubling speed will increase performance >>anywhere from 30-70 points per doubling. For argument's sake and to split the >>difference I'll assume that 50 is likely pretty close. Using 2450 as the base >>this would translate into an elo of 2850 give or take a bit. >>Is it really possible that a machine which is stronger (marginally) rating wise >>than the world champion is right around the corner. Or am I missing something >>here in making this estimate? >>In any event I'd love to see Kasparov tackle this baby in a 40/2 24 game match. >>Bets anyone? :) >>Regards >>Peter > > > The increment of peroformance doubling speed is more little as speed >increases. Doubling speed allows, usually, to go one ply deeper. So it's very >different to go from ply 7 to ply 8 than to go from ply 50 to ply 51, isn't it? > > José C. You need to read the ICCA Journal. There is lots of evidence (now) that going deeper does indeed lead to better play.7 to 8 is clearly going to do more than going from 50 to 51. But 7 to 8 might not be any better than going from 14 to 15 or even 19 to 20, based on experiments both I and Ernst did. Programs _still_ find better moves at deeper depths, even when the depth is increased from 14 to 15 or 15 to 16.
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.