Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 16:21:09 01/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 14, 2000 at 18:58:43, Amir Ban wrote: >On January 14, 2000 at 18:42:21, Pete R. wrote: [snip] >>This is most likely correct, come to think of it. Kasparov came to the belief >>that he was playing a whole host of top GMs during the Kasparov vs. The World >>game, whereas in reality the bulk of analysis for the world team was done by >>Irina Krush and her trainers, two IMs on the world bulletin boards, and >>contributions from amateurs using computers. But due to his natural ego I think >>he is inclined to build up his adversary. So rather than believe that one man >>can design a chip and create a machine to beat him, it is much more satisfying >>to believe that it takes the power of one of the world's largest corporations to >>handle him. > >In this case, I would agree with him. I have to agree as well. I don't think the DT chip (by itself) could have won. Therefore, it takes the enormous efforts, resources and talents of IBM to pull the whole thing off. And while the chip was a burst of glory, without a super-fast memory bus to relay the data back and forth from the chess processors, you won't see the massive gains of parallelism that were seen. The impact of the GM's that helped to tune and the other experts like Campbell was all part of the effort. I don't know how much the whole thing cost, but I would guess it was in the millions of dollars. I'm sure that IBM got their money's worth out of it. But I will never pan IBM for what they did. It was the best thing ever to happen to chess [IMO-YMMV]. The heart of the idea was Hsu's. But without millions of dollars from IBM, I doubt very much if there would have been any computer match victories over Kasparov in the 90's.
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.