Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 23:47:06 09/30/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 30, 1999 at 20:26:02, Peter McKenzie wrote: >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. > >This isn't a simple question. >My basic take on the issue is that programs that sacrifice some speed (in terms >of NPS) in return for a better evaluation will do better as hardware speed >increases and/or time controls get longer. The basic premise behind this >argument is that an extra ply of search depth becomes less important at greater >depths, so at greater depths the evaluation function becomes a more important >factor. And the basic problem with this take is that the premise, at least by today's best guess, simply wrong. ref: Crafty Goes Deep, DarkThought Goes Deep (both in ICCA Journal) Dave
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.