Author: James C. Logan
Date: 19:18:00 01/16/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 16, 2006 at 20:04:37, Joseph Ciarrochi wrote: >I just finished some testing between the betas. It was 4 min with 2 sec >increments on a decent pentium. Nooman test set. Default paremeters. All games >were versus fritz9. There seems to be no significant differences, but it is >critical to not infer too much, given n size is still small and this was against >only one engine. > >best >Joseph > > > >Rybka beta 1 58-42 >Rybka 9b 59.5-40.5 >rybka 10d 56 - 44 Interesting - my feeling is that 10d is slightly weaker against Fritz 9 than Beta 1 was, and that it is a bit stronger against Fruit 2.2.1. I have a database (Chessbase format) with 47 games Rybka 10 vs. F9, and 100 games Rybka 10d vs. Fruit 2.2.1. All games at time controls 4'/40+4'/40/+4'. Rybka 10 and 10d with defaults except using adaptive mode. F9 and Fruit using their own books, Rybka using Perfect 8.32. Scores - +15/-14/=18 vs. F9 , +37/-23/=40 vs. Fruit 2.2.1 I will email the .cbv to anyone who wants it.
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.