Author: Martin Müller
Date: 08:12:50 07/19/99
Go up one level in this thread
On July 18, 1999 at 21:56:29, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: > >On July 17, 1999 at 11:16:52, blass uri wrote: > >> >>On July 16, 1999 at 17:59:42, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: >> >><snipped> >>>I don't believe Hiarcs depends on hash tables as much as Fritz does; in fact, >>>this is what has been said by technical support at Chessbase, and technical >>>support at Gambitsoft. >> >>I do not know. >>I do not believe chessbase about it. >> >>I know that 64MB halped Hiarcs significantly even at blitz time control(see >>james walker games) >>so I believe that in games 144 MB can help Hiarcs in tournament time control. >____________________ > >If you don't want to believe representatives from Chessbase, I will not argue >with you. :) > >However, I still feel that the amount of megs available for hash tables is more >critical in Fritz. Perhaps that is why it has been reported that Fritz will lose >on time while Hiarcs generally does not - just a guess. > >Mel > > >> >>Uri Please note that I had to correct the result in favour of Hiarcs 7.32 as Hiarcs 7.32 did not reply. Therefore the result was closer according to my oppinion. I only "killed" for my personal evaluation those games where the opponent (Hiarcs 7.32) did not reply and play at all. Kind regards Martin
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.