Slashdot Mirror


Codename Brutus: Chess-Playing FPGA PCI Card

rockville writes "Brutus, a FPGA add-in PCI card developed by ChessBase and Dr. Christian Donnegar, just dominated a strong field of human players at a tournament in Germany. It's the first serious chess-playing FPGA architecture since Deep Blue was disassembled after its victory over Kasparov in 1997. Pictures of the card and a short description are here."

18 of 260 comments (clear)

  1. How long till.... by RevJim · · Score: 5, Interesting

    How long till chess players are banned from wearing watches, because Deep Blue et al will be shrunken to the size of a pea?

  2. And poor me by alexborges · · Score: 5, Funny

    I havent been able to beat gnuchess....:(

    --
    NO SIG
  3. okay by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    I for one welcome our new chess playing overlords!

    mod me -1 Redundant, dammit!

  4. The Solution by John+Paul+Jones · · Score: 4, Funny
    Microsoft needs to offer something like this, offloading worm/virus processing from the CPU.

    I bet they'd make another billion.

    --
    Feh.
  5. Slightly Off Topic by Davak · · Score: 4, Interesting


    As the power of computer "thinking" increases, I personally believe that a computer will soon be able to beat any human player by pure power alone. Chess will fail to be dominated by people.

    But what stands in its place? Forever I have thought of chess as THE place where the mind can still beat the computer in a game environment.

    What will be the next challenge? Where is there a game that requires the uniqueness of human thought over the pure power of computer calculations?

    Davak

    1. Re:Slightly Off Topic by VistaBoy · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The game of Go is extremely difficult to implement on a computer. I guess that's the next computing challenge.

    2. Re:Slightly Off Topic by Xerithane · · Score: 4, Funny

      Congratulations!

      You win the prize for being the first person to mention Go while being logged in in a chess story is this comment.

      --
      Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
    3. Re:Slightly Off Topic by greppling · · Score: 4, Informative
      I am reluctant to give the answer, as every timechess programs come up on slashdot, someone has to make a post referring to Go:

      Computers are still very weak at this Asian board game. And despite many people trying to make substantial progress with that. The best open-source one, GNU Go, is btw not very far away from the best commercial ones.

      There is a Go Wiki with, among other things, a short introdcution.

    4. Re:Slightly Off Topic by MagPulse · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The last games to be conquered by machines will be physical like soccer, or involve recognition of speech or visual information. Humans use their brains to their fullest in those activities; it's what they're best at compared to machines. When AI gets that far, if you believe in the Singularity, we'll be at it.

    5. Re:Slightly Off Topic by El · · Score: 4, Funny
      Where is there a game that requires the uniqueness of human thought over the pure power of computer calculations?

      Computers have never done well on "Jeopardy"; they keep forgetting to "please phrase your answers in the form of a question."

      --

      "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

  6. One crazy scientist! by trippinonbsd · · Score: 5, Funny

    Look at that guy, he looks like a mad scientist.

  7. Finally... by wolrahnaes · · Score: 4, Funny

    I was almost giving up on /.
    It's been days since we had an article about something that is really cool but useless for all practical tasks

    --
    I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
  8. Hmm by mkweise · · Score: 4, Funny

    Deep Blue was disassembled after its victory over Kasparov in 1997

    Kinda makes you shudder to think what they would've done to Kasparov if he had won...

    --
    Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the War Room!
  9. Computers will never beat us at... by Scrameustache · · Score: 5, Funny


    Twister.

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

  10. on the other hand by Trepidity · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Most people are exceedingly bad at Go as well. The top Go players are invariably those who have been doing essentially nothing but playing Go since they were 3 years old, leading many to hypothesize that the root of good Go play is essentially astoundingly good pattern recognition.

  11. Deep Blue was not dismantled by phr2 · · Score: 5, Informative

    It's in the Smithsonian and the hardware is more or less intact. It's in the typical condition of a decommissioned computer, i.e. you can't just flip a switch and start using it, but there's some chance that the folks who built it could get it working again sometime. This is described in the book "Behind Deep Blue: Building the Computer That Defeated the World Chess Champion" by Deep Blue's designer F.-H. Hsu. Hsu later got interested in building a Shogi (Japanese chess) machine using FPGA's. He says with today's custom VLSI, the equivalent of Deep Thought could be built on one chip and mounted in a compact flash card. You'd put the card into your Zaurus or Ipaq PDA and have a grandmaster-strength pocket chess machine. He put some effort into commercializing such a device but couldn't get enough backing so he went off to greener pastures.

  12. Re:FPGAs by FunOne · · Score: 4, Informative

    VHDL the language may not be specific, but to properly use/take advantage of an FPGA architecure it must be specifically targeted. Writing VHDL for implementation ( and not just simulation) requires targeting the specific final implentation (FPGA, CPLD, VLSI) and even the specific brand/type/etc.

    FPGA designs require dynamic processes (so that they can be reprogrammed) and highly regular, repetative, and predicatable implementation. That does NOT make them easier to change process with. Unlike memory/processors that can be reclocked or relabeled, the FPGA needs to be as exact as possible to get proper functionality out of it.

    If you want a good "Getting started with Hardware Design" I suggest attending a university for a Computer or Electrical Engineering degree.

    Coding VHDL for HW implementation is NOT easy, its not just VHDL->Synthesis->DONE. There is tons of testing and retesting to determine if it synthesized right, if its timed right, if its functional under all inputs/circumstances. Getting a properly simulated and funciontal VHDL design (in the synthesizable VHDL subset that is) is only step ONE of a design. You then have to get a design that is still functional that will synthesize. Then you have to get a design that is still functional that synthesizes that performs correctly.

    Its not the kind of thing that you can learn in 21 days from a Sams publishing book.

    --
    FunOne
  13. Re:FPGAs by seanadams.com · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have quite a few books on VHDL and logic design and this one is absolutely the best book for a beginner:

    Fundamentals of Digital Logic Design with VHDL

    Based on little more than what I found in that book, I was able to implement my first chip, which is currently shipping in the SLIMP3 network music player. Managed to fit the design in a small XC95144XL CPLD, which handles memory buffering, DMA transfer, IR capture, and serializing of data to feed to an audio decoder.

    It starts with the most basic building logic building block and boolean algebra, and moves step by step from there to a basic CPU. Very well organized and easy to follow, with excellent examples.

    Please DO NOT start with the Xilinx Foundataion kit and the examples therein. It will not make any sense. Actually it'll make even LESS sense to you if you have any software background at all.