Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 12:10:29 09/30/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 30, 1999 at 14:35:25, Charles Unruh wrote: > In the past i thought faster hardware would benefit slow searchers like >Chessmaster more than fast searchers like Fritz. Now i'm more inclined to >believe that it makes more sense that faster hardware benefits fast searchers >more. For the reason that positional ideas are for the most parts moves made >from practical experience/knowledge, that we can't always quite calculate. >However, faster hardware gives programs the ability in many instances to >actually be able to calculate the result. So although i think Chessmaster is a >truly awesome engine especially against programs running up to 233Mhz I expct >that on a P450Mhz it will come in 3rd or 4th. I don't think we really have any data on that. The SSDF results may shed some light when the 450Mhz results are complete, if they test the same programs they tested at 200MHz. What it all boils down to is fundamental algorithms. If some algorithm is O(n^2) and another is O(n*log(n)^2) they may behave very similarly for some ranges. But at some point the faster algorithm will dominate. Given enough hardware[*] the fastest algorithm will always win. [*] If the function is asymptotically superior, then it may win at infinity, in which case the result is only theoretical.
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.