Yes, I am aware of that. I was laughing about how 2.0 used to be the cool new thing, and now a few years later it's outdated.
Deep Blue vs todays (computer chess programs)
Sort:
200 000 kN/s of Deep Blue are worse of 20 kN/s of Droidfish run on ARM CPU.
For Houdini, Rybka, Stockfish, Komodo to beat Deep Blue you do not need Quad-core, downclocked 10 Mhz 1 core is enough.
Houdini 4 the cool new thing? lol! (in advance)
fburton wrote:
Houdini 4 the cool new thing? lol! (in advance)
Nope, Komodo 8 ^_^
TheGreatOogieBoogie wrote:
fburton wrote:
Houdini 4 the cool new thing? lol! (in advance)
Nope, Komodo 8 ^_^
I was looking at K 8 in the ChessBase store this morning. Pay day is Friday!
pfren wrote:
Deep Blue was not a computer software, you are not well informed.
It did contain software.
Back in 1997 Deep Blue easily defeated the best software of the time. Huge improvements in software and hardware since then, it has been 18 years. Hey, we have a Carlsen simulator in the Play Magnus application so why not a Deep Blue simulator? 😜
I suspect that creating an accurate Deep Blue simulator for modern devices would be a significant undertaking, and probably not worth the effort required.
No way, Deep Blue would get destroyed by today's computers. I think people don't really realize how good computers have gotten relative to where they are now. Kasparov (with a rating of 2812) managed to take quite a few games from Deep Blue. That means that Deep Blue, winning by a narrow margin, is probably 2850-60. By contrast, Komodo, the leading engine today, has a rating of 3340, i.e. there is no contest here.
Forgive me for bumping an old thread but I think this thread is meant to be bumped every couple years.
First of all, *when* the question was originally asked, the answer was very clear to anyone who knows anything about engines: 1997 Deep Blue on its hardware would get demolished, in a very ">400 ELO" way by ANY top engine on ANY hardware. It wouldn't need multiple core to do it. It wouldn't need an opening book, an endgame tablebase, or any ridiculous overclocking.
Top engine, one core, no databases crushes 1997 Deep Blue. Possibly in a 100-0 type of way.
Of course nowadays the difference would be even more drastic. Any smartphone running pretty much any engine would send Deep Blue to the scrap heap 100-0 for sure.
Houdini 6 Pro on a smartphone with pawn and move odds with a time handicap (H6's 1 minute vs DB's 10 min) and it would still be one-sided. Probably still 100-0.
Humans v computers!
Ha!
Buy a blue leotard - and survive.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kfYP7uTZX8Y&index=11&list=RDC_vtGMUzPnM
I own George Washington's axe -- the one he used to cut down the cherry tree of lore.
Granted it's had eight new heads and about a dozen new handles....
!!