Author: Willie Wood
Date: 20:30:32 12/23/97
Go up one level in this thread
On December 23, 1997 at 19:45:14, Hans Havermann wrote: >On December 23, 1997 at 01:00:06, Willie Wood wrote: > >>Was this game played on the same machine? If so, what did you do about >>permanent brain settings? Same-machine games are a problem because if >>you disable perm brain, the programs are not performing as intended, and >>if you enable it, then there's the time-sharing interference problem >>(esp on the mac, w/o true multi-tasking). > >Yes, it was played on the same machine. Permanent Brain was *on* for >HIARCS. I don't know what HIARCS can or cannot do on the Macintosh... >Then again, I don't know what MacChess can or cannot do. This was not >meant as an encounter between equals. I bought HIARCS for its reputed >chess-smarts. I use MacChess because of its solid Macintosh look and >feel. HIARCS cost me $135 US plus. MacChess is free. HIARCS' hash table >size is fixed. MacChess enjoys the luxury of a 32MB transposition table. >In the eight games I've refereed between them, HIARCS has won three, >MacChess, none. Is the contest fair? I doubt that it *can* be fair. That >not the point of this exercise. > Hans, first of all it's nice to talk to a fellow experimenter of mac programs, esp since I think I have everything ever written for the mac (chess-wise). I too got Hiarcs because of it's rep. I have found that's it's significantly better than MacChess 3.0 in most situations, but not all. I will download MacChess v4 to check out differences. I would hope to find a bit more eval, and less nps. Now, the point about permanent brain. You say that Hiarcs' was on, but you don't mention MacChess. I found that MacChess 3.0 did not run properly when another program was executing (eg, time would stop if a foreground program would hog the cpu). So, you can see that for a same machine match, you have to be sure of the time-sharing methods, otherwise your results are suspect. I agree with you about reasons for buying the programs, MacChess has a much better interface, just leaps ahead of Hiarcs. And I prefer to play MacChess for that reason. Also, because my program is more competitive with it. But I don't understand your point about not being able to make the contest fair. I think people go to great lengths to make sure tournaments are fair, handicaps correct, etc. And, that is the whole point of having contests. To make it fair, and determine the winner. Otherwise, why bother? You can make your match between Hiarcs and MacChess fair. Simply configure each program for standard tournament conditions, and play the game. You really need two machines for this, or a lot of patience. If you don't have two machines available, I'd be willing to participate in some matches with you over ICC, or fics. Assuming we have the same machines, roughly. WW
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.