Has Jonny on 2000 cores ever beaten Komodo 28-0?Lyudmil Tsvetkov wrote:
Alpha hardware equivalent was somewhere 1024 standard cores.
How 1024 cores compare with 64 cores?
How scientific is that.
AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 184
- Joined: Sun Nov 01, 2015 3:15 am
Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo
-
- Posts: 4190
- Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 1:47 am
Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo
Show me open community that has access to V100?jhellis3 wrote:Why are you using old GPU architectures for your comparison. The 1080 has no tensor units, so obviously it will be much slower.
The V100 on the other hand should be ~75%+ the performance of a TPU2.
I am comparing to what common ppl have access too.
You seems to be sticking to apples and oranges most of the time.
-
- Posts: 546
- Joined: Sat Aug 17, 2013 12:36 am
Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo
Ok, you are useless, bye.
-
- Posts: 4190
- Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 1:47 am
Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo
Hehe too many Google fanboys around here it seems .jhellis3 wrote:Ok, you are useless, bye.
-
- Posts: 438
- Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:06 pm
Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo
1080 ti is 11.3 TFLOPS:Milos wrote:So you claim single gen1 TPU is just only like 5x stronger than Nvidia 1080 GPU????Rémi Coulom wrote:5000*5*12/(24*365) = 34.25 yearsMilos wrote:Care to elaborate, add any substance beyond your one-liner childish reply?Rémi Coulom wrote:Your math is wrong. I think it is doable with a distributed effort smaller than what was used for Stockfish.Milos wrote:4 hours my ass (pardon my french). Try training it on state-of-the-art 1080.
Fully trained network requres 12h on 5000 gen1 TPUs for self-games and 64 gen2 TPUs for training itself.
Gen1 TPU is like 30x K80 which is like 5x 1080 in performance.
So you'd need like 375k training days with 1080, which is like 1000 years!!!
Gee, you really have no clue about hardware, do you?
TPU is like 92 TOPS, 1080 is 0.3TFLOPS. Please educate yourself before trying to run discussions with one-liner replies.
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11172/nv ... t-week-699
A TPU is 45 TFLOPS:
https://arstechnica.com/information-tec ... ute-cloud/
-
- Posts: 1339
- Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 9:43 am
- Location: New Delhi, India
Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo
This really seems revolutionary !
Beating Stockfish 10-0 is no joke.
I wonder when such a Program would be made available to customers at a reasonable price ?
Beating Stockfish 10-0 is no joke.
I wonder when such a Program would be made available to customers at a reasonable price ?
i7 5960X @ 4.1 Ghz, 64 GB G.Skill RipJaws RAM, Twin Asus ROG Strix OC 11 GB Geforce 2080 Tis
-
- Posts: 261
- Joined: Sun Nov 13, 2016 10:37 am
Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo
Not 10-0.
Result: +28 =72 -0
Result: +28 =72 -0
-
- Posts: 1339
- Joined: Fri Nov 02, 2012 9:43 am
- Location: New Delhi, India
Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo
Oh, even more awesome !sovaz1997 wrote:Not 10-0.
Result: +28 =72 -0
i7 5960X @ 4.1 Ghz, 64 GB G.Skill RipJaws RAM, Twin Asus ROG Strix OC 11 GB Geforce 2080 Tis
-
- Posts: 4190
- Joined: Wed Nov 25, 2009 1:47 am
Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo
1st gen TPU is 92 TOPS and an OP is an 8bit int multiplication.Rémi Coulom wrote:1080 ti is 11.3 TFLOPS:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11172/nv ... t-week-699
A TPU is 45 TOPS:
https://arstechnica.com/information-tec ... ute-cloud/
Lets cut this crap of comparing apples and oranges. Please take a look at:
https://arxiv.org/abs/1704.04760
The actual comparison (not apples and oranges stuff you mention) you can see in Table 6 where typical ML application are compared (MLP and CNN).
Factor between first gen TPU and K80 (that is 3-5x faster for ML compared to 1080) is between 15 and 60 averaging around 25x.
-
- Posts: 438
- Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 8:06 pm
Re: AlphaZero beats AlphaGo Zero, Stockfish, and Elmo
The GTX 1080 should be faster than a K80. For instance, this is a deep learning benchmark where it is 4x faster:Milos wrote:1st gen TPU is 92 TOPS and an OP is an 8bit int multiplication.Rémi Coulom wrote:1080 ti is 11.3 TFLOPS:
https://www.anandtech.com/show/11172/nv ... t-week-699
A TPU is 45 TOPS:
https://arstechnica.com/information-tec ... ute-cloud/
Lets cut this crap of comparing apples and oranges. Please take a look at:
https://arxiv.org/abs/1704.04760
The actual comparison (not apples and oranges stuff you mention) you can see in Table 6 where typical ML application are compared (MLP and CNN).
Factor between first gen TPU and K80 (that is 3-5x faster for ML compared to 1080) is between 15 and 60 averaging around 25x.
https://medium.com/initialized-capital/ ... bd85fe5d58
They have roughly the same number of cores, but the clock speed of the 1080 is 3x the clock speed of the K80. 16nm vs 28 nm technology. The 1080 is definitely faster.
The reason I used 5x in my initial formula is that I believed you meant in your message that a 1080 is 5x slower than a TPU (5x slower than a K80 cannot be correct).
Anyway, whether a TPU is 5x or 10x faster than a 1080 does not change much to the fact that the experiment of DeepMind can be replicated in a few months of distributed computation with ~100 participants, which should be less than the effort that was used by Stockfish so far.