Author: Frank Quisinsky
Date: 03:14:46 07/16/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 15, 1999 at 14:46:01, Johan Havegheer wrote: >On July 15, 1999 at 04:09:04, Shep wrote: > >>Has anyone run some performance tests with any Winboard engine to compare its >>speed with the same engine running under Fritz? >>I have read occasional comments here that performance under pure Winboard was >>better, but can anyone provide some numbers like "XYZ is about n% faster under >>Winboard"? >> > >Not easy to answer. Maybe some Winboard insiders(like Skibbe and Quisinsky) >could say more. I did a (very) little test on a LCT II position (combination 7) > Winboard Fritz5.32 GUI >Bionic 4.01 2'29" 2'28" >Phalanx 21 13" 12" > >Seems no big difference to me > >Johan > >>--- >>Shep Hello Johan, The problem with engine-engine (Winboard engines) match under Fritz is, that some programms probably do not clear the hashtables in a correct way. Another big problem is the correct time-control handling. The results from testsuites may be the same under Fritz, but there are significant differences in playing games. Fritz has a better GUI than Winboard, but at the moment one can't play meaningful test matches under Fritz, altough there are many engines running under Fritz. Under Fritz it's not possible to produce a DEBUG-File (a very good way to find errors). I think there are problems with Bionic Impakt 4.01, ZChess1.2, Phalanx 21. Bionic Impakt, because some Fritz commands, documented on the chessbase page, are not implemented. A very interresting fact is, that the native Crafty 16.06 is much faster than the Winboard Crafty. I hope Chessabse will adopt the concept of free engines, to solve these problems. Kind regards Frank
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.