Assuming the 2 microseconds mentioned is for the whole board (you don't mention what board-size, I assume 19x19) it sounds quite fast. But probably not an order of magnitude faster than a software solution. The question then becomes how well it scales. Would you need 64 of these to service a 64-core computer?
Note: at some point you should decide for yourself what project you think is worth taking on. You'll always find that other people have 100 reasons why not to try something, but they're often wrong. Mark On Wed, May 29, 2013 at 8:02 AM, Detlef Schmicker <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > sounds interesting. I am not to experienced with large patterns at the > moment, but we (oakfoam) are using >1000000 (circular) patterns up to 15 > (as the size is counted in several papers), so 30000 might be not enough > for a strong program. Usually we need all pattern matches at the board > at the same time, is your 2ms this time? > > I am very interested in GPU acceleration, as this might be very > interesting in mobile devices. They usually have a strong GPU and I was > thinking about accelerating exactly what you are talking about. It is > somewhat difficult to calculate the performance this approach would > offer. > > Another interesting acceleration might be real liberties (instead of > pseudo liberties) in the playout moves. This might help to use more > heavy playouts. But I do not have data, if this would help, as we do > only have pseudo liberties. > > Detlef > > > Am Mittwoch, den 29.05.2013, 21:38 +0400 schrieb Рождественский Дмитрий: > > Hi, > > > > after thinking over your advices in the previous thread and making some > investigation I have figured out two options of working on the hardware > accelerator. One is to develop a totaly new algorithm that fits for a > hardware acceleration better than current ones. Or to find what can be > improved in current algorithms moreorless revolutionary, because just > acceleration of an algorithm part is not a solution, > > > > I thought that maybe it will be interesting to improve pattern matching. > Current programs can massively match relatively small patterns. Hardware > may have the following parametres: > > - pattern size up to 9x9 with wildcards ("does not matter" field state > to eleminate influence of insignificant peripheral stones' positions); > > - additional attributes as usual (liberties, ko, distance to an edge) > > - internal position calculator with pattern extractor (just send a cell > position and receive its belonging to a pattren back) > > - several patterns' evaluation at a time (should further specify how > much) > > - about 30000 7*7 patterns in an $200 device > > - about 2 microseconds time > > > > Does anyone have an idea will it be valuable? > > > > Dmitry > > _______________________________________________ > > Computer-go mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > [email protected] > http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >
_______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
