Author: Uri Blass
Date: 01:52:07 10/22/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 22, 2002 at 03:30:12, Stefan Zipproth wrote: >On October 21, 2002 at 07:53:53, Brian Katz wrote: > >>On October 21, 2002 at 07:40:54, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >> >>>It is well known that Deep Fritz 7 needs fast hardware to play at full strength. >>>And in this respect your P_II/350 MHz is indeed too slow and any comparison with >>>Fritz7 only a waste of time. >>>Kurt >> >>Thank you Kurt >>That is the answer I was looking for. I suspected that that might be the case. >>Thank you and Uri for your replies. >>Much appreciated. >>Brian > >... no, that's not the answer. 8 games say nothing. Like it was said before, try >tossing a coin 8 times. Both sides have the same "winning" chances, but you will >easiliy get results like 5-3. To measure the difference between these two >engines significantly, you would need to play thousands (!) of games, >independend from time controls. This is simple math, but unfortunately no one >seems to believe it. > >Just use ELOstat - or play another 8 :-) > >Stefan 8 games do not prove which program is better but they may suggest some conjectures. It is a waste of time to play some thousands of games instead of checking the number of nodes of Fritz at slow hardware and fast hardware to find out if Deep Fritz7 does not earn more from fast hardware. I have not both programs so I cannot do the comparison on fast hardware. The poster gave some information about the number of nodes in his slow hardware. Uri
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.