Author: walter irvin
Date: 04:37:24 01/27/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 27, 2000 at 01:21:28, Jeremiah Penery wrote: >On January 26, 2000 at 18:00:29, walter irvin wrote: > >>Deep Blue has great results to its credit but it has had great hardware .the >>following programs at equal speeds are as good or better . >> >>1.cm 6000 >>2.fritz 6 >>3.junior 6 >>4.m-chess 8 >>5.shredder 4 >>6.tiger 12 >> >>at equal mhz programs like fritz 6 would get more nps im sure. > >Equal MHz, eh? Let's calculate the total MHz of DB's chess chips: 2.4 MHz/chip >* 480 chips = 1152 MHz. After you factor in that DB was only getting about 30% >efficiency, it was still doing 200M NPS, so that translates to 173611 NPS/MHz. >I don't think Fritz can calculate 173K NPS on a 1 MHz machine. Sorry. > >>they would search >>much deeper than deep blue. > >Fritz on an 1152 MHz machine might get 14 ply at 3 min/move. DB was getting the >same. Fritz has selective-search (null-move) errors. DB hasn't. DB extends >_way more_ than Fritz, so it sees way more than Fritz. > >>in computer vs computer matches speed kills , thats >>why on the ssdf , programs on faster hardware get inflated ratings . > >At equal MHz speeds, it's shown that DB is faster. Therefore, by your logic, it >would win. >At equal NPS, the programs are the same speed. Which one will win, then? i thought it had more computing power than that , surely it did .a 1 ghz kyrotec athlon is available ,you can get that less than $3000 . i thought deep blue was at least a $100,000 machine .
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.