Author: Jorge Pichard
Date: 09:24:55 03/06/00
Go up one level in this thread
On March 06, 2000 at 01:18:05, blass uri wrote: >On March 05, 2000 at 18:09:29, Jorge Pichard wrote: > >>Most Programs perform excellent whenever there is a tactical position, but some >>programs perform better tactically than strategically. A good comparison is >>between Rebel 10 or Tiger Rebel, which are very good programs strategically >>compare to Deep Junior or Junior 6.0.which is very good tactically. But when you >>match them Deep Junior 6.0 is a little bit better than either of the previous >>mentioned programs. > >Why do you think that Junior6 is better in tactical positions relative to >TigerRebel? > >Junior6 searches more nodes per second but you cannot learn from it that it is >better in tactics. > >I know that Rebeltiger did better results in enrique's test suite relative to >Junior6. >I know that most of the improvement from Junior5 to Junior6 was about the >evaluation function. > >Uri I am basing my oppinion on a small test between Junior 6.0 Vs Rebel Tiger 12e of 50 games in 60 minutes per side, using two identical AMD 800 Mhz and Junior 6.0 won 28 games; probably the time control and speed of the computers used has a lot to do with the result. It could be that Junior 6.0 calculate deeper than Rebel Tiger 12e, providing faster processor and allowing a time control greater than 60 minutes per side per game. Pichard
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.