Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Draw!

Posted by michael on from the dueling-banjos dept.

An anonymous reader writes "Heise (publisher of the famous german computer magazine c't) started a most unusual CPU benchmark, today. A dual P4 Xeon 2400 and a dual AthlonMP 2000+ have to prove their abilities to ... play chess! The opponents are running two of the best chess AIs (Previews of Deep Fritz 7 and Shredder 6), so there are four different configurations. With each configuration about 55 matches (~24h) are played. As yet AMD/Fritz is leading, but the benchmark has just started. You can follow the duell online [Sorry, site is in german, but the graphics of the java-applet should be multi-lingual]. What's next? Who wouldn't like to see a Linux/Windows mine sweeper death match!"

62 of 243 comments (clear)

  1. Eh? by SkyLeach · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I'm not asking for any other reason than I really want to know:

    What does this prove about performance?

    --
    My $0.02 will always be worth more than your â0.02, so :-p
    1. Re:Eh? by kervel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      not true. since computer chess is about searching trees, the fastest computer is able to search deeper in the tree and get a more accurate picture of the best move.
      if you want more info about how chess computers
      (and AI in general) work:
      http://www.gamedev.net/reference/programmin g/featu res/chess1/
      http://oellermann.com/cftchess/notes/ shortcuts.htm l

    2. Re:Eh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I seriously cant understand how you people can sit there and say "how is this a benchmark??"

      Are you kidding me???

      If you cant see how this is a reasonable benchmark at all go back to grade school.

      The simple fact is that the more grunt a computer has, the further a computer can see into the "future" in order to pick the best move. Personally, i think its a brilliant benchmark, and I would also suggest that it can be taken for granted that he'll be running all combinations of chess engine and cpu otherwise, it would all be pointless.

  2. Time is limited by nniillss · · Score: 4, Informative

    For each game, both opponents have 10 minutes in total plus 2 seconds per move. Everything else being equal (or symmetric, with all combinations of programs being used) it is not too far fetched to assume that the faster machine wins on average

    1. Re:Time is limited by [TWD]insomnia · · Score: 2

      The system who is going to have the advantage is the one with the best system optimization. If there are heavy SSE2 optimizations, chances that the Dual Xeon is going to win. If it has heavy pure FPU operations, then the Athlon is going to win. It's that simple. It's no better than any conventional benchmark

    2. Re:Time is limited by SirSlud · · Score: 4, Funny

      better shmetter. the coolness factor (which doesnt seem that popular around slashdot in these sombre times) is off the chizz-arts!

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    3. Re:Time is limited by halftrack · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Machine means all hardware. In a chess game a machine who can't pull as many moves from RAM as it can process would have a disadvantage.

      --
      Look a monkey!
    4. Re:Time is limited by AntiNorm · · Score: 2

      Everything else being equal (or symmetric, with all combinations of programs being used) it is not too far fetched to assume that the faster machine wins on average

      Or more accurately, the algorithm with the better implementation.

      --

      I pledge allegiance to the flag...
      of the Corporate States of America...
  3. Better watch out... by mansa · · Score: 2, Funny

    Is overclocking considered cheating? I hope the AMD doesn't get hot "under the collar"!

  4. explanation? by gripdamage · · Score: 3, Informative

    Hey everybody complaining about this not being a benchmark... presumably they are going to compare performance such as "AMD Fritz vs. Intel Shredder" against "Intel Fritz vs. AMD Shredder" when the games are all over. Unless the first move for instance contains some random factor the games should be exactly the same, no matter which processor is running the program. So they'll add up how long it takes for each processor to decide to make the same moves. Maybe?

    1. Re:explanation? by tomstdenis · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Wrong. Get a clue. Each cpu gets 10 mins per GAME and 2 seconds per move.

      The idea is that the faster cpu will beable to try out more moves before actually comitting to a move. More studying presumably means better chess.

      Tom

      --
      Someday, I'll have a real sig.
    2. Re:explanation? by tshak · · Score: 3, Insightful

      There is a reason that IBM's Deep Blue was not a P3 1Ghz - it needed tons of CPU power to compete with Kasparov. In theory, with the same chess engines, the faster computer will win the game each time. That is the point of these tests.

      Also, considering the Athlon is rated at 2000, the P4 should win each time. It would be also be more beneficial to ignore said "ratings", and look at the budget. If they spent $5 building the P4, and $3K building the Athlon, then it's an unfair comparison because they weren't equal budgets. Unless, however practically useless, you want to see who has the fastest CPU regardless of price.

      --

      There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
    3. Re:explanation? by DavidRavenMoon · · Score: 5, Interesting
      There is a reason that IBM's Deep Blue was not a P3 1Ghz - it needed tons of CPU power to compete with Kasparov.

      I believe the original Deep Blue used PowerPC 604e CPUs. The newer version is a 32-node RS/6000.

      But there is more to Deep Blue than CPU power.

      How Deep Blue Works

      "Deep Blue is not only the finest chess-playing computer in the world, it is also the fastest. This makes perfect sense, because history has proven that the fastest computers conduct the most extensive searches into possible positions. More searches gives the computer a wider array of moves to choose from and therefore a greater chance of choosing the optimum move."

      "Deep Blue uses 'live' software that can actually generate up to 200,000,000 positions per second when searching for the optimum move. The software begins this process by taking a strategic look at the board. It then computes everything it knows about the current position, integrates the chess information pre-programmed by the development team, and then generates a multitude of new possible arrangements. From these, it then chooses its best possible next move."

      "The software inside of Deep Blue is one all-inclusive program written in C, running under the AIX operating system. Deep Blue utilizes the IBM SP Parallel System called MPI. 'It's a message-passing system,' says Hoane. 'So the search is just all control logic. You're passing control messages back and forth that say, well, what am I doing? Did you finish this? OK, here's your next job. That kind of thing at the SP level.'"

      "The latest iteration of the Deep Blue computer is a 32-node IBM RS/6000 SP high-performance computer, which utilizes the new Power Two Super Chip processors (P2SC). Each node of the SP employs a single microchannel card containing 8 dedicated VLSI chess processors, for a total of 256 processors working in tandem. The net result is a scalable, highly parallel system capable of calculating 60 billion moves within three minutes, which is the time allotted to each player's move in classical chess."

      --
      -- if it was so, it might be; and if it were so, it would be; but as it isn't, it ain't. That's logic - Lewis Carrol
    4. Re:explanation? by frankie · · Score: 2

      Four rounds of play means they are also doing the "mirror match" contests of AMD Fritz vs Intel Fritz and AMD Shredder vs Intel Shredder. Those two will be purer benchmarks, since it eliminates the program differences.

  5. Hey by sinserve · · Score: 5, Funny

    My MS-DOS 5/286 Commander Keen is challenging Taco's lesbian Sims running on a Linux
    ThinkPad, to a side scrolling mud fight.

  6. For the German Impared by ALoverOfPeace · · Score: 2, Informative

    AMD is up 11-7, with 8 stalemates. AMD has 15 points (57.7%) while Intel has 11 (42.3%). I assume the points are some sort of chess match scoring mechanism. I've only had 2 years of rudementary German, so I can't translate the article or anything close.

    1. Re:For the German Impared by TC+(WC) · · Score: 2, Informative

      As I understand it, you get 1 point for a win, 0 for a loss. However, for a draw you each get a half point.

  7. Update: submission is from yesterday by nniillss · · Score: 5, Informative
    The first match ended with a slight advantage for Shredder/Intel versus Fritz/AMD: 20 wins, 22 losses, 29 draws. The present match is for the flipped combinations: now Shredder/AMD leads with 11 wins, 7 losses, and 8 draws against Fritz/Intel. These results indicate a superiority of the AMD architecture (2x Athlon MP 2000+) over the Intel architecture (2x Intel Xeon 2.4 GHz) (see here) which would be in line with the chess SPECINT result.

    Note that both programs learn from game to game within each match, but are reset after the match. In the first match, Shredder started very weak and had a steeper learning curve against Fritz. Since in the second match Shredder/AMD already started strong, a landslide victory for this combination appears likely.

  8. iii'm da paaarty poopar by yobbo · · Score: 2

    Can't wait for Big Blue to rock up and kick both their asses :)

  9. server problems by Patrick13 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I hope neither of these machines is also hosting the web server, because it looks like it just got slashdotted.

    :(

    --
    ::.. check out some Cell Phone Reviews
  10. A better idea by cybian · · Score: 5, Funny

    I have a better idea. Put up two identical websites; one on AMD, one on Intel. Post the links on Slashdot and see which one stays up the longest.

    1. Re:A better idea by orkysoft · · Score: 2

      Have you never heard of the phenomenon called "double blind test"?

      --

      I suffer from attention surplus disorder.
  11. Uhh ... AMD is winning? by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 2, Informative

    I may not be the best at understanding german, but I can certainly translate this:

    Anmerkung zur Runde 1: Fritz/AMD gewinnt geget Shredder/Intel 20 Partien, remiseirte 29 Partien und verliert 22 Partien

    into

    Noted for round 1: Fritz/AMD won against Shredder/Intel in 20 games, got a draw in 29 games and lost 22 games.

    Translating that into points, AMD has 34½ points (20 wins * 1 point/win + 29 draws * ½ point/draw) and Intel has 36½ points (22 * 1 point/win + 29 draws * ½ point/draw).

    How is AMD winnning?

    And at the moment, that score means nothing, as Shredder could be the better program, but being held back by the Intel CPU, just as Fritz could be the better program being held back by the AMD CPU - we won't know until the bitter end.

    Talk about premature conclusions ... this is even more premature than CNN declaring Gore, then Bush, then Gore, then Bush the winner of Florida ...

    Next time - learn the language of the article before drawing conclusions.

    --
    We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
  12. How about... by ocie · · Score: 2

    A rock/paper/scissors benchmark.

    --
    JET Program: see Japan, meet intere
  13. Nostalgia for old pentium jokes by sam_handelman · · Score: 5, Funny

    Queen's Rook to Queen's Rook 3.999998456

    --
    The good and new comes from no quarter where it is looked for, and is always something different from what is expected.
  14. Re:Uhh ... AMD is winning? Well ... maybe ... by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 2

    Hmm ... next time, I should enable Java in my browser ... hehe

    It would appear that at this moment, AMD has 49½ points and Intel has 47½ points. But it's still too early to define a winner.

    --
    We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
  15. Chess games are finite by yerricde · · Score: 4, Informative

    all this processing power, and i'm watching two computers too stupid to draw.

    Chess has several ko rules that will end the game after no progress. For instance, if twenty-five rounds have passed without a capture or pawn move, or if the same board position has appeared three times, the game is a draw.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
    1. Re:Chess games are finite by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 2

      or if the same board position has appeared three times, the game is a draw.

      Uhm, isn't it in three consecutive moves from both white and black?

      --
      We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
    2. Re:Chess games are finite by Alsee · · Score: 2

      There are some positions where it has been proven that more than 50 moves are required to win against best defense.

      I was about to mention that myself...

      Those positions are excepted from the rule.

      That I didn't know! Wouldn't that kind of rule get very long and ugly?

      I just did a google seach and came up with this:
      "Indeed, the FIDE Laws of Chess from 1993-1997 excepted certain classes of position from the 50 move rule. Although the Laws have since reverted"

      Yep, the rules for it got way too long and ugly :)

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    3. Re:Chess games are finite by paul.dunne · · Score: 2

      No. This is a common mistake. The rule states that if an identical position, with the same player to move, has occured three times in the game, then the game is a draw by "repetition of position". It isn't a draw by virtue of repetition of moves, but by repetition of position.

    4. Re:Chess games are finite by Alsee · · Score: 2

      'll bet they change it right back, though, if the human World Champ reaches one of those positions against a computer.

      I have a question... were you envisioning the human or the computer having the "won" position? And what is your reaction if you consider the reverse situation?

      I doubt they will re-instate it. It's a laundry list of special cases. You don't want to have to look up a messy chart in a rule book every time you hit the endgame.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    5. Re:Chess games are finite by Alsee · · Score: 2

      The human would have the winning position. The defenses that extend the game out beyond the 50 moves are, well, weird. It would be difficult for even the best human players to "defend" perfectly.

      Ahh, now I understand your position, but I think you're mis-judging the situation. Often it is easy to defend and it is the attack that needs to be flawless :)

      Here's a facinating problem, I suggest you actually try it: Grab a friend and a chessboard. You take a bishop, knight and king vs a lone king. Try to force a checkmate. Tell him to defend. Let him start with his king in the middle of the board. It's *possible* to force checkmate, but it's long and takes robotic precision. A brain-damaged yak playing defence can drag out the game merely by always trying to move to the center of the board. A human who has never studied this problem before doesn't have a chance in hell of pulling it off during a competition game. I believe it was first proven winnable by computer.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    6. Re:Chess games are finite by Alsee · · Score: 2

      When I played tournament chess I held a master's rating.

      Ah, cool. I used to be top board on my highschool chess team, but I never got rated.

      I didn't really see a difference weather it's the computer attacking or defending in one of these cases. Changing the 50 move rule would give the computer time to force a mate about as often as it gave a human time to get the mate.

      A flat change in the rule to 75 or a 100 moves could work. It's just a 50 move limit with 3 pages of exceptions that becomes a problem. It becomes expecially bad when they keep changing the rule every time a new case is analyzed.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
  16. Win vs Lin by josh+crawley · · Score: 2

    article:

    ---"Who wouldn't like to see a Linux/Windows mine sweeper death match!"

    Does a crash count as a withdraw?

  17. tomshardware by brer_rabbit · · Score: 5, Funny

    Too bad this wasn't on Tom's Hardware instead. Regardless of the winner of the chess match, Tom's would determine the winner by highest frame rate in Battle Chess.

    "Despite losing to the AMD, the Intel with the GeForce8 XP 512GB AGPxxx had a frame rate of 1882 FPS. Any chess player would appreciate the 4X anti-aliased graphics of the rook rock-monster pounding the opponent's pawns to pieces."

    1. Re:tomshardware by josh+crawley · · Score: 5, Funny

      "GeForce8 XP 512GB AGPxxx "......

      SO! The industry finally found that adding the "porno transfer bus" along with standard AGP.

      I guess in the future, autopr0n does survive ;-)

    2. Re:tomshardware by zerocool^ · · Score: 5, Funny

      • And they'd do
      • it with 42 pages


      • of explanation

      • and have only
      Two words

      • per
      • page.


      • ~Will
      --
      sig?
  18. Re:Java Plugin for Mozilla by captain_craptacular · · Score: 2

    I just clicked on the "get plugin" puzzle piece and dl'd the netscape java plugin... It seems to work fine for me.

    --
    They who would give up an essential liberty for temporary security, deserve neither liberty nor security
  19. Actual contest is... by Krieger · · Score: 3, Informative

    4 seperate rounds of roughly 55 games day. We've caught it at the beginning of the second day. AMD lost the first day by a couple points 20 wins, 29 ties, and 22 losses. AMD is currently winning the second round as of 8:28PM EST 12-7-9. Everyday they reset the computers (since the programs learn over the course of the day), and switch the programs. Obviously they're going to attempt to fill the product matrix and see which processor performs better with the different programs.

    I'm curious to see how the different platforms perform...

  20. What does this have to do... by ImaLamer · · Score: 2

    Hey, people quit complaining about how this is pointless or what-not.

    It's just damn cool. I'm interested in the results because, well it's just cool.

    Go ahead mod me down. This is "key", people who think this isn't "key"... well they aren't "key". Scornful moderators aren't key.

    --
    Get your Unix fortune now!
  21. well, maybe. by jon_c · · Score: 3, Informative

    There are AI competitions http://www.cs.ualberta.ca/~darse/rsbpc.html

    -Jon

    --
    this is my sig.
    1. Re:well, maybe. by Lord+Omlette · · Score: 2

      The best science that people can come up with for Paper-Scissor-Rock is based on the Princess Bride?!

      --
      [o]_O
  22. Ko by yerricde · · Score: 2, Informative

    Is there an over-riding force to prevent stalemate moves from continuing forever?

    See my other comment.

    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  23. um by Ravagin · · Score: 2

    Who wouldn't like to see a Linux/Windows mine sweeper death match!

    Sorry? They're going to play each other in minesweeper?

    --

    Karma: T-rexcellent.

  24. Linux/Windows Texas Cage Match by rocjoe71 · · Score: 5, Funny
    Who wouldn't like to see a Linux/Windows mine sweeper death match!

    They already tried to pit Windows versus Linux in a chess match:

    1) the Windows machine refused to make its first move-- Microsoft executives explained later that they shouldn't have to make the first move as this could lead to a compromise of it's security system, thereby leaving its horsey vulnerable to worm attacks.

    2) Microsoft later on changed the rules of the chess game citing their freedom to 'innovate' chess, creating new game pieces like 'bazooka' and 'platypus'. Unfortunately, they wouldn't tell anybody else how to use the new pieces or even document that there _were_ new pieces. Once it became apparent that the new pieces were there the Linux camp asked to have them removed but Microsoft refused on the basis that removing the pieces would irretrievably 'break' the game of chess.

    --
    Height: 38U, Weight: 0 Newtons, Eyes: #0000FF, OS: Gray Matter 1.0 (Alpha)
    1. Re:Linux/Windows Texas Cage Match by brer_rabbit · · Score: 5, Funny

      Additional chess pieces added by Microsoft include a thimble, race car, dog, shoe, cannon, top hat, and wheelbarrow....

    2. Re:Linux/Windows Texas Cage Match by inburito · · Score: 2

      But what about clippy?

    3. Re:Linux/Windows Texas Cage Match by ImaLamer · · Score: 2

      Damn this should be an article in itself.

      --
      Get your Unix fortune now!
    4. Re:Linux/Windows Texas Cage Match by Lars+T. · · Score: 2

      Then MS would cheat by letting Gates play for the computer.

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

    5. Re:Linux/Windows Texas Cage Match by Lars+T. · · Score: 2

      Hello! We were talking about Monopoly!

      --

      Lars T.

      To the guy who modded me down from perfect to terrible Karma - Apple haters still suck

  25. Benchmarking via Chess by CaptainCaveman_2002 · · Score: 2, Funny

    So... does this mean that Deep Blue has a better benchmark score than Gary Kasparov?

    Fascinating...

  26. Or... by Matey-O · · Score: 2
    "What's next? Who wouldn't like to see a Linux/Windows mine sweeper death match!"
    Just have one Lindows box, sitting the the corner, playing with itself.
    --
    "Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus."
  27. Weird opening moves ... by Hektor_Troy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I've been watching this match on and off for the last couple of hours, and it seems to me, that they have some pretty weird opening moves (as in "non classical") ...

    1. d2-d4 Ng8-f6
    2. c2-c4 g7-g6
    3. g2-g3 Bf8-g7
    4. Ng1-f3 0-0

    Not having played a lot of chess on time, I'm not entirely sure, if these are regular moves to upset the board quickly - any players willing to venture some guesses?

    --
    We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
    1. Re:Weird opening moves ... by peter+stayne · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're certainly right, they are 'non-classical', but not uncommon. Openings like that one are known as King's Indian Defenses and are part of a larger group of openings called Hypermodern.

    2. Re:Weird opening moves ... by mefistofeles · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, actually a correct terminology would be that both are using an indian setup. To me the Kings Indian black plays d7d6. Should black play d7-d5 in the aforementioned position it would be Grünfeld(-ish).

      /Mef.

    3. Re:Weird opening moves ... by tomknight · · Score: 2
      My favourite is the St George's Defence... Karpov v Miles, 1980.
      1. e2-e4 a6-a7

      Miles won after 46 moves. Karpov said he found Miles' defence to be an "insult". Class.

      Tom.

      --
      Oh arse
    4. Re:Weird opening moves ... by tomknight · · Score: 2
      DOH!! I meant, of course,
      1. e2-e4 a6-a5

      (Although a6-a7 would be pretty amazing!)

      And yes, I previewed. Sad really....

      Tom.

      --
      Oh arse
  28. Re:What this proves... by Ctrl-Z · · Score: 2

    "This is not about which chip is smarter, but about rooting for a sentimental favorite and cheering until a winner is crowned."

    That's the wrong game. You're thinking of checkers.

    --
    www.timcoleman.com is a total waste of your time. Never go there.
  29. Windows/[Gnu/]Linux Minesweeper Deathmatch by Ctrl-Z · · Score: 2


    Oh, come on! That wouldn't even be a challenge. Windows wins hands down... I mean, you stick with what you're good at, right?

    --
    www.timcoleman.com is a total waste of your time. Never go there.
  30. Intel Shredder by Captain+Large+Face · · Score: 2

    Personally, I'm looking forward the Intel Shredder vs. AMD Leonardo, Donatello, Raphael and Michaelangelo.

    Will the rooks look like Technodromes? Will Krang (?) play the king? April could definitely be the queen, although it's a bit of a wierd combination with Splinter, who'd have to be the other king..

    Game on!

  31. Re:Can anyone explain... by krogoth · · Score: 2

    Branch prediction wouldn't affect this. It only predicts what code to execute next, not what move to make. The only way the processors could make a difference is if the faster one has an advantage.

    --

    They that quote Benjamin Franklin on liberty and safety deserve neither.
  32. Re:Can anyone explain... by krogoth · · Score: 2

    I may not have been entirely accurate about branch prediction, but in the end it's just another way to make the processor work faster. Now how does the speed affect the performance of theses AIs?

    --

    They that quote Benjamin Franklin on liberty and safety deserve neither.