Author: James B. Shearer
Date: 18:21:06 11/01/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 01, 1999 at 18:20:21, Christophe Theron wrote:
>On November 01, 1999 at 16:10:04, James B. Shearer wrote:
>
>>On November 01, 1999 at 01:44:56, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>
>>>On October 31, 1999 at 19:20:00, James B. Shearer wrote:
>>>
>>>>On October 31, 1999 at 18:10:33, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>>>
<snip>
>I used to like what Bob is doing, but I realize there are less and less reasons
>to appreciate him anymore.
Hyatt is what he is. I don't think he's changed much.
>>>> As for whether Crafty is ahead or behind, Crafty can use multiple
>>>>processors and some other programs cannot which I expect you are ignoring.
>>>
>>>Of course I know that.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>It is unreasonable to say Crafty is behind based on ignoring areas in which
>>>>Crafty is ahead.
>>>
>>>Crafty has been initially developped as a single processor PC program IIRC. As
>>>such, his algorithms are definitely behind most of the commercial programs.
>>>
>>>Crafty indeed needs several processors to get the strength of a good commercial
>>>program running on a single processor.
>>>
>>>So if the following is more to your taste: "Crafty needs a big hardware
>>>advantage to play equal with the good commercial programs".
>>
>> What advantage? We will give both programs multiprocessors. If other
>>programs are too backward to use the extra processors that's not Hyatt's fault.
>
>
>That's interesting. So you consider most of the top programs to be backward?
In that respect yes. If you are to be believed, Crafty is backward in
uniprocessor performance. Both count. If Crafty is so lousy why was Ban
wasting time playing it manually on ICC?
James B. Shearer
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.