Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 14:35:11 11/08/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 08, 1999 at 14:27:35, Alexander Kure wrote: >On November 07, 1999 at 21:09:04, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >[snipped] > >>Lang may have dominated the micro programs.. but he _never_ dominated computer >>chess. The 'program to beat' went like this: >> >>1960-1970 MacHack (Greenblatt) >>1970-1977 chess x.x (slate) >>1977-1979 chess x.x and belle (slate/thompson) >>1980-1982 Belle/Chess x.x/Cray Blitz (slate, thompson, hyatt) >>1983-1986 Cray Blitz >>1987-present deep thought/deep blue (Hsu) >> >>No other programs were close during those time periods, if you talk about >>'micro programs'. > >[snipped] > > >Hi Bob, > >I think that your last sentence neglects the fact that Fritz 3 running on a >Pentium 90 MhZ beat Deep Thought in Hongkong 1995. After this 'disgraceful' >event the micros took the lead over the mainframes. > >Greetings >Alex You _really_ believe that? They lost two whole games to other computer programs during a 12 year span of time, and they were 'taken over'??? I wish you had a chance to try on Cray Blitz at 7M nodes per second. You might discover that it is _not_ exactly a patzer. And it isn't close to deep blue either... based on games _actually_ played vs them. For every micro win over a 'mainframe' someone can dredge up 10 losses to mainframes. I don't think the gap has closed at all... it has spread further, because the micro computers of today are _nowhere_ near the supercomputers of 5 years ago. In raw computing speed or any other measure... And the micros aren't even in the same rating pool with deep blue.
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.