Author: Serge Desmarais
Date: 15:05:41 09/18/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 18, 1998 at 14:01:43, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >On September 17, 1998 at 21:32:58, Serge Desmarais wrote: > >> You seem to give too much importance to the engine difference... I think it >>was said that Fritz on a K6 200MMX (as opposed to a P II 200MMX) was about >>25-30% slower MAXIMUM. But to reach a depth of ONE ply deeper in the same time, >>one computer has to be between 500 to 600% faster! > >This is an old argument that I do not agree with. The false premise is that in >order to get stronger you have to search another ply. > >Imagine it this way instead. Rather than saying, 25% is useless because it >doesn't give you an extra ply, consider thatn with a 25% increase in nodes per >second, a shot that takes you a minute to find before will now only take 80% of >this time to find, which is 48 seconds. > >I would gladly suffer a lot in order to find a 60-second shot in 48 seconds. > >I think that what I have said is enough, but I think that I can continue and >find another flaw. If it is fair to give one side a 25% disadvantage, it should >be fair to give a 25% advantage instead. Since either of these is fair, perhaps >you could randomly pick between these alternatives with no concern. > >Choice one is to let you go 80K nps while your opponent goes 100K nps, which >means you are 25% slower. Choice two is to go 125K nps while your opponent goes >100K nps, so you are 25% faster. If you think for me to go 25% slower is fair, >then you should have no problem with my going 25% faster. But the difference >from my point of view is 56%. Whatever Newborn says, I will win more games if I >go 56% faster than I otherwise would. > >Both of the extremes cannot be "fair" at the same time, given your lower bound >of 25%. You can't just look at the deviation from equal hardware, you have to >consider what would happen if the hardware were swapped, in order to really see >it from your opponent's point of view. > >bruce Of course, the faster you can go, the better! But I said the above because Youri said that a won match could become a lost match, by decreasing the speed of a program by 25%. If a program won a match by 21-19, even with no decreasing in spead, it could lose the next one. Just that I don't think that if the same program won 30-10, it could lose only because a 25% decrease in speed? Serge Desmarais
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.