Author: blass uri
Date: 22:22:12 09/12/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 12, 1999 at 20:54:47, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On September 12, 1999 at 10:43:37, Randy Schmidt wrote: > >>I do not believe that Crafty running on any processor(s) would >>be stronger than Hiarcs7.1, or for that matter Junior. My >>large caveat is that the time control be something like eight >>hours a move (perhaps even 50 hours a move). >> >>My point is that the positional elements of Junior and Hiarcs >>would supercede the speed of crafty on a souped up computer. >>On any time control faster than 40/2, I think Crafty would have >>a decisive advantage. >> > > >Here's a point to ponder. If "junior" has a lot more 'positional understanding' >than crafty, how would you explain the fact that it is _far_ faster than crafty. >In fact, it is likely the fastest program running that I have seen NPS numbers >for. The theory that slow searchers are better positional understanding is not a right theory because the question is not nps for second but if the evaluation function is good. For example I think that Crafty has better positional understanding relative to tal because tal is too optimistic about the positional advantage. It is not clear to me if Junior is a better positional player relative to crafty but you cannot learn about it by the number of nodes per second. I believe that the latest version of Junior is better in positional understnding relative to previous versions and it is looking at the same number of nodes per second. 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.