Re: When will the chess programmers write an engine that plans ?
Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2020 8:21 pm
Stockfish on a wimpy cellphone plays very good chess. This is on alpha-beta.
Computer Chess Club
https://talkchess.com/
Thre's no way that a 6502 at 5 MHz is anywhere as fast as a 68k at 12 MHz. Not only because of the clock frequency, but the 6502 is an 8 bit processor while the 68k is 32 bit internally (with 16 bit data bus).
With much inferior hardware. So the progress must have been in the software (traditional AB!), something that you usually deny.And the MM5 came out 1990. that’s 7 years later.
It turned out to be a dead end that just played inferior chess compared to AB engines even if these ran on much slower hardware. And then you wonder why this wasn't the future?Thomas nitsches Concept of trying a human way of thinking computerchess is not wrong. It was ahead of its time.
Yes, you'd think the massive computation Leela is doing would be obvious to everyone just from the extreme heat and noise produced when it's computing, but for some reason many have magical thinking and ignore it all.Dann Corbit wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 8:13 pmIf, indeed, Stockfish is a "bean counter" engine (as they say) then LC0 is the "beaniest of bean counters".Ras wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 6:21 pm If NN had anything to do with the (still weak!) human way of thinking, then you wouldn't need a super high-end graphic card with all its raw computing power to run LC0. And if AB is blindly throwing cr*p against the wall and see what sticks, then NN with MCTS is rolling dice to decide which cr*p to throw against the wall and see what sticks.
That is because a really good GPU like the 2080 TI will do 26.90 TFLOPS in 16 bit mode :
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/g ... 0-ti.c3305
So a pair of them has 53.8 TFLOPS in 16 bit mode (which LC0 can use).
Now, a state of the art CPU like the 3990x gives 1571 Gflops in double precision:
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/hpc/A ... Linux-1666
So about 3000 Gflops in single precision. That is 3 TFLOPS, Now, that is a staggering number for a CPU. But it is 18 times slower than the two GPUs.
So, if we are to talk about bean counters, the LC0 program is four fold "beanier" than Stockfish.
Match it against SF on the same tablet and see what happens.
Total playouts. Thats actually full games, so a "node" means something completely different from SF's nodes. You're comparing apples to oranges here.NPS: Nodes per second, including NNCache hits and terminal node hits, but excluding nodes carried over from tree reuse. In other words, total playouts generated per second.
I think it comes from the unfortunate definition of node for NN programs. But it does make them look clever. I guess it is kind of like Rybka nodes, which had *cough* a little fudge factor.
Even if they were defined the same way, it wouldn't say anything about how much computation is needed per node. It's a terrible measure of computation. We could create a "great" engine just by making it compute for days or weeks on a supercomputer for each node. I wonder how impressed everyone would be by our super-engine.Dann Corbit wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 8:59 pm I think it comes from the unfortunate definition of node for NN programs. But it does make them look clever.
Performance is not important. We cannot learn anything from performance.Ras wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 8:23 pmThre's no way that a 6502 at 5 MHz is anywhere as fast as a 68k at 12 MHz. Not only because of the clock frequency, but the 6502 is an 8 bit processor while the 68k is 32 bit internally (with 16 bit data bus).
______________
I am relating the 1802 with the 6502.
OK, the language is there - MM5 was in assembly while Glasgow was in CDL, which was claimed to be only 1.5-2 times slower than assembly, which still doesn't make up for the more powerful 68k.
With much inferior hardware. So the progress must have been in the software (traditional AB!), something that you usually deny.And the MM5 came out 1990. that’s 7 years later.
________________
The 6502 is not inferior then the 1802.
and yes MM5 came out 1990 and mephisto III 1983. that’s 7 years of software development and hardware development.
It turned out to be a dead end that just played inferior chess compared to AB engines even if these ran on much slower hardware. And then you wonder why this wasn't the future?Thomas nitsches Concept of trying a human way of thinking computerchess is not wrong. It was ahead of its time.
Performance oriented programming is not about humans and human thinking. It's about making ideas as native as possible to how computers actually work.
Testing stockfish is a waste of time.Ras wrote: ↑Tue Mar 24, 2020 8:58 pmMatch it against SF on the same tablet and see what happens.
Besides, you're misinterpreting what a node even means for LC0. From the Github page:Total playouts. Thats actually full games, so a "node" means something completely different from SF's nodes. You're comparing apples to oranges here.NPS: Nodes per second, including NNCache hits and terminal node hits, but excluding nodes carried over from tree reuse. In other words, total playouts generated per second.