Author: Volker Pittlik
Date: 00:36:07 04/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On April 15, 2004 at 01:10:34, Jouni Uski wrote: >Why not simply play UCI engines under UCI GUI and Winboard engines under >Winboard? Because sometimes it is interesting to compare Winboard only and UCI only engines. > These kind of adapters are unnecessary! This is true. It applies for all free software including Winboard and Arena. > Need both: use ARENA!! It can be done this way. Without any doubt Arena is a very good software offering some features Winboard is missing. On the other hand it depends of what someone is intending to do what GUI to choose. Let me give an example: In my last test I played several thousands of bullet games. Because Shredder was among the competitors I had to choose between Arena and Winboard plus a tournament manager plus Bookthinker and an UCI2WB adapter. The tournament needed some weeks of CPU time and I before I start I tested both setups. It turned out the setup with Winboard was _much_ faster because Arena needs a lot more time when starting a new game. In additon it had to be restarted from time to time as a workaround for an error that have been present at that time. I don't know if this has been fixed meanwhile. By using Winboard I saved some _days_ of tournament and processor time. Not to talk about the waste of electric energy. There have been some other differences. It seems to me the books created with Bookthinker are better than the Arena books. I haven't tested that. It is just an impression. In additon it wasn't possible to use Arena together with TLCV at that time. It has been announced it is possible now but I haven't read someone tested it. Polyglot wasn't available at that time but now it is and it works much better than the former UCI2WB adapter which had some bugs. Regards Volker
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.