Author: Arnon Yogev
Date: 18:41:17 01/09/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 09, 2006 at 19:38:59, robert flesher wrote: >why not 64 bit providers a huge speed gain from what I have read. Even if its >only 30-50 elo that is alot. An extra ply here or there can spell death. I >prefer to see testing under fair conditions. I don't think that this particular type of hardware advantage can cause such a difference in results. Do you honstly think that the 32 bit version would score below 50% just because of it? hard to believe.. For example, take a look at the latest CEGT results : Rybka 1.0 Beta 32-bit Vs. Deep Shredder 9 2CPU 512MB == 104 + 50 = 25 - 29 ! The barely 80 kn/s fish slaughters the double CPU'ed kn/s monster. Hiarcs versus the same opponent scores + 16 = 15 - 19 which is pretty decent, but not slightly close to Rybka's result. From my personal exeperience I can tell you that while playing online for the first time i could pass the 2600+ rank with my antique P4 1.8 playing against _much_ faster machines. all this thanks to Rybka. before that era I could barely pass the 2450 rate with any other engine.. Rybka just brought back all the fun =). I don't ask Hiarcs to win every match it set against, But I think that we could except more from a commercial release .. Surely just to give some more competition. (I'm not speaking just about Rybka, so spare the "it was not available at the time"..) AY. PS if the setting is really better than default, Why on earth it was not discovered before the release ? I remember enrico said that they ran more than 1000 long games for the beta version before the release, so I mean, none of the beta-testers could have just think about changing some parameters? that's their jobs and why they are betatesters anyway..
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.