Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Faster Hardware benefits slow searchers or fast searchers more???

Author: Peter McKenzie

Date: 02:26:54 10/01/99

Go up one level in this thread


On October 01, 1999 at 02:47:06, Dave Gomboc wrote:

>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)

I'm not convinced by the methodology used in the 'Go Deep' papers.  But
certainly the premise could be completely wrong :-)

One interesting point, as discussed in the DartThought articles, is that most
published self play experiments have been statistically insignificant.

Another thing, perhaps fixed ply games aren't what we should be interested in
since in real games searches are much deeper in the endgame.  Fixed time would
be better.

>
>Dave



This page took 0.01 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.