Author: Jorge Pichard
Date: 07:45:53 03/07/00
Go up one level in this thread
On March 07, 2000 at 10:35:10, Jorge Pichard wrote: >On March 07, 2000 at 01:37:02, blass uri wrote: > >>On March 06, 2000 at 20:56:45, Jorge Pichard wrote: >> >>>On March 06, 2000 at 13:50:49, blass uri wrote: >>> >>>>On March 06, 2000 at 12:24:55, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>>> >>>>>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 >>>> >>>>It is also possible that Junior6 had a better evaluation. >>>>You cannot learn from the fact that Junior6 won that it calculated deeper. >>>> >>>>Uri >>>My friend who owned Rebel Tiger 12e knew before the mini match how to set his >>>program to play with the strongest setting I remember him setting his program to >>>this setting: >>> >>>Rebel Tiger 12e >>>Permanent Rrain ON >>>Analysis Brain OFF >>> >>>He bought his AMD Athlon 1 week before I did and since my old AMD computer was >>>too slow a K6 300 Mhz , he recommemded me to buy an AMD ATHLON 800 Mhz similar >>>to his; I was undicided wether to buy an Intel Pentium III 800 Mhz but just >>>because of the price and Performance difference and also due to the fact that he >>>decided to Bet a small fortune of $ 250.00 I agreed to buy it since we are both >>>programmers interested in the progress of chess softwares. We are facinated >>>to see how much progress chess softwares have accomplished lately. We would like >>>sometime to dedicate time to make our own chess Program, but our dedication to >>>Microsoft has enable us to program our own chess program, we understand that >>>chess programs have advance so much, that there is little that could be improve >>>nowaday except the capability of using Multiprosessors which Deep Junior 6.0 is >>>capable of using. >> >>I do not believe that there is a little that could be improved. >> >>I believe that if people develop the right program then even a program on 386 >>can beat kasparov >> >>Uri >Sorry but I disagreed with your logical reasoning. If you compare (Rebel 10, >Rebel tiger 12e or Deep Junior 6.0) to Deep Blue, any top programmer will assure >you that these programs have more Chess Knowledge than Deep Blue, But >when you compare Deep Blue hardware capacity to the most advance PC, even the >latest AMD Athlon 1000 Mhz just released, you probably need 50 processors like >the latest AMD Athlon put into parallel just to match Deep Blue caculation >capacity.
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.