Author: Drexel,Michael
Date: 09:10:22 09/22/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 22, 2003 at 05:13:32, Uri Blass wrote: >On September 22, 2003 at 01:57:02, Drexel,Michael wrote: > >>On September 21, 2003 at 19:54:12, Mike Byrne wrote: >> >>>Current SDDF ratings >>> >>> Program/Computer Rating >>>1 Shredder 7.04 UCI 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2810 >>>2 Shredder 7.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2770 >>>3 Fritz 8.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2762 >>>4 Deep Fritz 7.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2761 >>>5 Fritz 7.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2742 >>>6 Shredder 6.0 Pad UCI 256MB Athlon 1200 2724 >>>7 Shredder 6.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2721 >>>8 Chess Tiger 15.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2720 >>>9 Shredder 7.0 UCI 128MB K6-2 450 MHz 2717 >>>9 Chess Tiger 14.0 CB 256MB Athlon 1200 2717 >>> >>>Based on everything I have looked at (analysis of positions etc), PF 2 is more >>>akin to Shredder 7 and not Shredder 7.04. On a Dell Axim running at 400 Mhz, >>>it appears to be about 12=15x slower than a P4 1.7 Ghz which runs pretty close >>>to a P3 1.2Ghz. >>> >>>If one assumes for the moment that doubling of speed is worth 50 points (which >>>is high IMO - I think it's closer to 35-40 points at the high end) - then we can >>>work backwards. For simplicity. let's just say an Axim is 16X slower than 1,2 >>>Ghz (it's not - but this make the numbers easier to work with). >>> >>>16x = 2^4. So we take 50 x 4= 200 points - so in the case PF2 on a Dell Axim >>>running Mobile 2003 is equal to 2570 to SSDF conservatively. >> >>38 Shredder 4.0 128MB K6-2 450 MHz 2571 23 -22 986 58% 2510 >> >>I think 2570 is way too high. Somewhere between 2450 and 2500 is more realistic. >> >>This over 200 >>>points higher than any estimate for any program running on the Palm Tungsten and >>>clearly ahead of any dedidicated unit.. This clearly in IM range and maybe even >>>weak GM level. >> >>Usually you dont want to play tournament games against it anyway. >>With imported Shredder7 book it would probably score ~50% against any Top >>Grandmaster in rapid chess (15,25 or 30 min) provided that they dont know the >>progam nor its book. > >Genius3(p90) already scored good results at 25 minutes per game including 1.5-.5 >against kasparov. >It lost 2-0 against anand but it also beated anaother GM 2-0 Genius 3 even on a modern PC is not very strong. Even a weaker player than I am can beat it with a Kingsindian attack or some strange Gambit lines. Kasparov played a bad opening line. > >It happened against unprepared opponents and kasparov even complained after it >that he believed that he was playing Genius2(kasparov later beated genius3(p120) >1.5-.5 when Genius3 used a different opening book but it was only after some >preperation from kasparov. Genius 3 played simply not enough games. It can win a two games match against any top chessprogram even today. > >I believe that Shredder4 on K6-450 is clearly better than Genius3 on P90 It should be clearly better in Computermatches. We have no idea how Shredder 4 on a K6-450 would perform against top players. >so I expect it to get more than 50% against the top GM's if they are not >prepared unless the top GM's play today significantly better than the level they >played in 1994 Of course the top players of today play significantly better. Opening theory has improved much and the opening is part of the game. Michael > >Uri
This page took 0 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.