RE: computer-go: Computer Go hardware

[David Fotland <fotland@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Have you tried goliath from 10 years ago against the latest goemate?  You 
might be surprised :)

At 06:57 PM 4/10/2001 +0200, Mark Boon wrote:
> My 2 cents worth: the strongest programs of today are only marginally 
> stronger than they were 10 years ago, when computers were 100 times slower 
> than they are today. So I think it's fair to say the efficiency index 
> value would actually be (significantly) lower than 0.01. So your value 0.7 
> is quite a wild guess indeed. If I would have to make a wild guess, I'd 
> rather put it in the 0.001 to 0.0001 range. And since the programs don't 
> get stronger with more processing power (not yet, anyway), the index is 
> subjective to getting halved about every 18 months.
>
>     Mark
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: owner-computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
> > [mailto:owner-computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Compgo123@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2001 7:23 PM
> > To: computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: computer-go: Computer Go hardware
> >   [ stuff deleteded ]
> > We may define a concept, calling it the 'logic
> > efficiency index'. For a best possible program, the index value is 1. I'll
> > make a wild quess here. Today's best program has an index value about 0.7. A
> > related question is, for Go, what's the relation between the index value and
> > the amount of programming?
> > [ stuff deleteded ]
> David Fotland