Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 15:47:58 11/15/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 15, 2000 at 18:27:27, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On November 15, 2000 at 09:05:36, CLiebert wrote: > >participants: > >Hiarcs7.32 A1100 (CSS-Master-Version) >Hiarcs7.01 P3-500 >Nimzo7 A1000 >CM6000 A1100 >DFritz 2xP3-866 >CTiger P3-840 >GTiger P3-500 >Junior6 A1000 >Shredder4 A800 (500MB RAM) >Zarkov501 A1000 >Rebel C.3 A1000 >Goliath L2.0 A650 >Gandalf P1000 >Cigorins Way Cel.500 > >1 rd., 22.00 > >Hiarcs732 (a1100 [CSS-Master-Version ?!?!])-Shredder4 (a800)0:1 > >the CSS-Master Version, whatever this is, loses to Shredder on >a slower hardware. what a pity. > >Goliath L2.0 (A650) - Deep Fritz ß (2xPIII/866) remis > >Goliath seems to have made a big progress in programming. >on a slower single-cpu it made a draw against chessbase famous >and "so called" besr program running on 2 faster cpu's. > >was the score 0.00 :-)))) > >ChessTiger (P3/840) -Hiarcs701 (P3/500) remis > >ChessTiger ?! do you mean Rebel-Tiger13 or really ChessTiger12 ? >Maybe the decision to give the normal Tiger the faster machine >was not that good. Since it's chessenthusiasts using their own machines and software it has nothing to do with deciding anything. You would be rather stupid if you swapped a faster machine for a slower one. So let's drop the usual conspiracy theories unless you have proof, okay? Mogens.
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.