9

What was the first chess engine that could beat the world chess champion when running on a standard desktop playing at standard speeds (i.e. not blitz chess)? For concreteness, say a $1000 PC.

13

Deep Blue was a super computer. In the 2006 match, Kramnik was defeated by Deep Fritz that everybody could buy.

In a November 2006 match between Deep Fritz and world chess champion Vladimir Kramnik, the program ran on a computer system containing a dual-core Intel Xeon 5160 CPU, capable of evaluating only 8 million positions per second, but searching to an average depth of 17 to 18 plies in the middlegame thanks to heuristics; it won 4–2.[31][32]

(source)

  • 4
    The comparison between a 1997 supercomputer and a 2006 standard machine isn't necessarily trivial. – Inertial Ignorance Feb 3 at 23:20
  • 3
    @InertialIgnorance I don't know but I am sure you couldn't afford IBM Deep Blue. – SmallChess Feb 3 at 23:23
  • 2
    True, but I'm talking about the comparison between computational speeds. A mobile phone today is much faster than a supercomputer in the 50's, even though the latter costed way more at the time. – Inertial Ignorance Feb 3 at 23:25
  • 5
    @InertialIgnorance A mobile phone today would have made the supercomputer TOP 500 list in the mid 1990s, nevermind the 1950s! – J... Feb 4 at 13:05
  • 2
    For reference, Deep Blue was evaluating 100 million (first version) to 200 million (updated) positions per second, but to a depth of only 6-8moves on average (to a max of 20 in some cases). Deep Fritz had better heuristics, allowing it deeper searches with fewer evaluations. – J... Feb 4 at 13:13
8

A standard desktop today is significantly more powerful than whatever machine Deep Blue was running on in the mid-1990s against Kasparov. Since Deep Blue was the first engine to beat a world champion, that's the answer to your question.

Note that there may have been an engine before Deep Blue that, if it ran on a modern day desktop, could have beat Kasparov. But we never saw such a match happen so it's just speculation to say any earlier engine than Deep Blue.

  • 5
    Thanks for this. It seems according to the wiki that Deep Blue was running at 11.38 GFLOPS which is roughly the speed of a cheap PC these days. However it's not 100% clear Deep Blue was better than Kasparov. The match was controversial. – Anush Feb 3 at 20:01
  • 8
    Note peak FLOPS and achieved FLOPS are very different things. And I'm not sure that FLOPS is actually a reasonable measure of performance in this case - Ian the HPC guy – Ian Bush Feb 3 at 20:30
  • 1
    Yes, the match was controversial. If you don't accept that Deep Blue was superior though, you could select the next engine that beat a world champion in a match (there's a list in the wikipedia page on "Computer Chess"). – Inertial Ignorance Feb 3 at 21:35
  • 8
    Deep Blue used significant amounts of custom hardware. It is not the answer to the question because it cannot "run on a standard desktop." – David Richerby Feb 4 at 14:41
  • 3
    Due to the specific hardware used by Deep Blue I am not certain that the assumption about powerful holds. A 10 year old GPU can probably still outperform a modern CPU when rendering graphics. – Thorbjørn Ravn Andersen Feb 4 at 16:08

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you acknowledge that you have read our updated terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy, and that your continued use of the website is subject to these policies.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.