Author: Mark Young
Date: 15:48:34 09/27/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 27, 1999 at 10:03:52, Enrique Irazoqui wrote: >On September 27, 1999 at 09:39:17, Bertil Eklund wrote: > >>On September 27, 1999 at 05:02:28, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On September 27, 1999 at 03:39:23, Micheal Cummings wrote: >>> >>>>Even though there are 4 programs ahead of it, but on much faster hardware. >>>>CM6000 tops all other programs on the 200 MMX, So the current list is a bit crap >>>>IMHO. Only 4 programs tested make the results look inflated and not accurate >>>>list. >>>> >>>>We all know the limitations of the SSDF, but maybe their should be a different >>>>list, cause it is not fair to only play 4 on that hardware and the rest get crap >>>>hardware. >>> >>>The problem, and I think they are going to receive complains about this, is that >>>the 4 programs tested on K6-450 ALL COME FROM CHESSBASE. >>> >>Hallo! >> >>We all know the reasons for the above. At first on the new hardware-level we >>test high placed programs and new programs. > >A few hours ago, I sent to a programmer my own list, based on the SSDF scale: Nice ratings list, do you have a web site that you post this list to....if not you should get one. > >P200MMX Test SSDF Diff > >Tiger 11.75 32MB 2602 >N732 128MB 2598 >CM6K 128MB 2591 >CM6K 16MB 2591 2577 14 >F532 128MB 2590 >H732 192MB 2584 2572 >F532 46MB 2579 2575 4 >N99a 128MB 2574 >F503 46MB 2566 2566 0 >N99a 46MB 2562 2567 -5 >H701 63MB 2556 2570 -14 >J5 128MB 2538 >J5 46MB 2538 2549 -11 >C166 128MB 2537 >R9 60MB 2524 2525 -1 >R10b 60MB 2524 >C1615 128MB 2524 >S3 128MB 2497 >W2K 192MB 2494 >M8 60MB 2492 2496 -4 >G6 192 MB 2489 > >Average difference = -2 > >________________________________________________ > >PIII-500 Test SSDF Diff > >F532 192MB 2674 2681 -7 >N732 192MB 2666 >H732 192MB 2657 2646 11 >J5 192MB 2611 2626 -15 >C16.18 192MB 2587 > >Average difference = 3.7 > >As you can see, so far on the PIII-500 I tested only CB programs too, and this >for 2 reasons: > >- they are strong >- they are easy to test with test sets > >It makes me laugh (sort of) to see these suspicions based on that. By the way, >CB didn't send me any hardware either. Pity. :) > >Enrique > >>I guess that we have been even more >>critizised if we had started with Genius2, Rebel7 and so on. Unfortunately we >>don´t have the resources to manually play CM6000 and are forbidden to play a lot >>of other interesting new programs. Of course all or most of the following >>programs should have been included in the list if we were allowed to play with >>them, Genius6, Zarkov, Wchess, Shredder3, CS-Tal and Rebel10. We hope to include >>McPro and maybe Rebel-Century, Chess-Tiger and Shredder4 as soon as possible, >>sorry I forgot another new CB-program Nimzo7.32. Of course also CM7000 if it >>includes auto-playing. >> >>Regards Bertil SSDF >> >>>They say the next list is due for November. I think they could correct this huge >>>diplomatic mistake by allowing other programs to use this hardware too. >>> >>>Of course, CM6000 looks like a good candidate. >>> >>>If they ask me, I can make a proposition for another good candidate... :) >>> >>> >>> Christophe >>> >>> >>>>I will take the result from the engines on 200MMX hardware, which makes CM6000 >>>>number 1.
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.