Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: I'm convinced Hardware plays limited role in Rybka's strength

Author: Graham Banks

Date: 23:43:06 02/27/06

Go up one level in this thread


On February 28, 2006 at 02:21:41, Graham Banks wrote:

>On February 28, 2006 at 02:17:11, Ryan B. wrote:
>
>>On February 28, 2006 at 02:08:03, Graham Banks wrote:
>>
>>>On February 28, 2006 at 01:59:07, Ryan B. wrote:
>>>
>>>>On February 27, 2006 at 23:51:54, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On February 27, 2006 at 22:25:44, Ryan B. wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On February 27, 2006 at 21:55:05, Charles Wane wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I just got finished playing a four game match at game/30 min between Hiarcs 10
>>>>>>>and Rykba 13d, Hiarcs had an Athlon64 3200 with 128mb hash, against Rykba
>>>>>>>running on a Pent II 450 with 128mb hash. The score was 2-2 !!  Yesterday I
>>>>>>>played about 14 games between rykba running on the same 450 against Deep fritz 8
>>>>>>>on the Athlon64 and rykba won the majority of the games!! Iv'e never seen a
>>>>>>>program with such inferior hardware play so strong. I actually rated rybka on
>>>>>>>the 450 on chessmaster 10th but letting rybka play the various personalities it
>>>>>>>ended up with a rating of 3055!! And lost only one game , running all on a mere
>>>>>>>Pent II 450.  I guess Rybka's case the chess knowledge means much more then the
>>>>>>>speed of the program? I don't know cause I'm not a computer chess expert, but
>>>>>>>all this seems bizarre.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>From what I have seen Rybka has great knowledge but not in the way of
>>>>>>traditional chess knowledge by having a huge evaluation function.  Like all
>>>>>>chess engines I expect Rybka to play better on faster hardware but I so far
>>>>>>think the gain of fast hardware is less than most other programs.  From what I
>>>>>>see Rybka ranks higher in blitz than long tc games.  This is at least the case
>>>>>>on the CEGT rating list.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Ryan
>>>>>
>>>>>I do not think that you are right here and rybka does not rank higher in blitz.
>>>>>
>>>>>Let compare the 32 bit versions of rybka
>>>>>
>>>>>blitz
>>>>>4 Rybka 1.01 Beta 13b 32-bit 2820 20 31 652 69.8 % 2675 23.0 %
>>>>>5 Rybka 1.0 Beta 32-bit 2811 9 12 3139 68.1 % 2679 29.2 %
>>>>>
>>>>>long time control
>>>>>
>>>>>3 Rybka 1.01 Beta 13-13b 32-bit 2869 28 28 494 73.9 % 2689 27.9 %
>>>>>5 Rybka 1.0 Beta 32-bit 2823 10 10 3670 68.8 % 2686 31.1 %
>>>>>
>>>>>You can see that rybka has higher ranking at long time control.
>>>>>
>>>>>I believe that the 64 bit version simply score too much to have reliable rating
>>>>>because it played in the long time control against opponents that are too
>>>>>weak(more than 300 elo weaker than it).
>>>>>
>>>>>Uri
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>Fruit is my reference point.
>>>>
>>>>CEGT 40/40
>>>>Rybka 1.0 Beta 32bit	2816
>>>>Fruit 2.2.1	2779
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>CEGT Blitz 40/4
>>>>Rybka 1.01 Beta 13b 32-bit	2820
>>>>Fruit 2.2.1	2767
>>>>
>>>>Ryan
>>>
>>>
>>>CCRL 40/40 (Athlon XP3800+)
>>>Rybka 1.0 Beta 32 bit   2883
>>>Fruit 2.2.1   2848
>>>
>>>For all intents and purposes the same points differential as the CEGT 40/40, so
>>>the gap doesn't seem to decrease much at longer time controls.
>>>
>>>Regards, Graham.
>>
>>
>>Interesting, thanks for showing me that.  What is the web site for CCRL?
>>
>>Thanks,
>>Ryan
>
>
>http://computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/


It's actually based on 40/40 Athlon 64 3800+
An error on my part.

Graham.



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.