Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:17:42 12/21/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 21, 1999 at 00:40:04, Greg Lindahl wrote: >On December 20, 1999 at 21:49:12, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>That's where you are wrong. A simple analytical approach: pick any part >>of the engine you want, and assume the time for that part can be driven to >>0.00 by hardware. Amdahl's law steps in quickly for the parts you can't >>drive to zero, and gives you a limit. > >Right. So on my example engine which spends 90% of its time in eval, you get at >most a 10x speedup. That's why I brought up that particular example. However, >you can then use a stronger eval, and get even more than 10x quality. > >> The search is at _least_ 10% of any >>program I know of. That means that there is _no way_ to speed any program >>up by more than a factor of 10, > >If you ignore quality. > >>I understand alpha/beta searching _perfectly_. If that is what you mean. If >>you are asking "would you like to have an eval in hardware so you can keep >>adding more and more knowledge without slowing the program down?" then I would >>say "heck yes". > >Wow, so we finally agree on something. > >>But that is _not_ going to produce a revolutionarily strong >>program in a year. > >Did I say that anything would produce a revolutionarily strong program in a >year? Nope. Perhaps this kind of statement is part of your conversational style, >but I am wondering where you got the 1 year figure, why you think it's >important, and so forth. You sure aren't answering a question I asked. > >>The ASIC is the _right_ way to solve this problem. > >I'm glad that you still know all the answers. > >-- g That last statement is your typical attitude. _I_ don't know all the answers. But if you knew Ken Thompson, Joe Condon, Tony Scherzer, Hsu, Campbell, etc. You might figure out that _they_ discovered all the answers over a 20-year period. I trust results that work, not vaporous ideas that only mimic something tried 20+ years ago and found wanting, then tried 10 + years ago in Hitech and _again_ found wanting... I do claim to know as much about alpha/beta searching as anyone. For one to parallelize the search, this is a prerequisite. I know about former hardware solutions only because I was friends with the people doing the development. But I _did_ listen when they talked. If you would listen a little more, this might turn into something interesting for everyone. As it is, it likely isn't interesting for anybody. There are too many aspects of this you don't (yet) understand, from computer chess algorithms, to commercial-vs-shareware disclosure...
This page took 1.66 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.