Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 06:31:21 01/26/98
Go up one level in this thread
On January 26, 1998 at 01:31:04, Richard A. Fowell (fowell@netcom.com) wrote: >>>However, in terms of strength, >>>HIARCS > Crafty > MacChess (IMHO). > >> I second that ... where would you rank Chessmaster? > >HIARCS 6.0 Mac > Chessmaster 4000 Mac > MacChess (IMHO) > >I know, I'm dodging the real question ... >but I don't have good data on CM4000 and Crafty 14.5 Mac. >For starters, I haven't figured out an easy way to run problem >tests on CM4000. > >For the moment, I'm assuming that CM4000 Mac is the same beast >as the CM4000 PC that appeared in the following list: > >http://www.elhchess.demon.co.uk/ehss.htm >estimated these Elo ratings on Pentium 100s: >HIARCS 6.0: 2536 +/- 16, >Chessmaster 4000: 2408 +/- 51. > >Which would put CM4000 128 +/- 53 points weaker than HIARCS. > >Trouble is: >I don't know that CM4000 Mac is the same engine as CM4000 PC >I don't know that CM4000 PC is even a single entity >I don't know the relative effectiveness of the CM4000 recompile vs. >HIARCS >It is hard to run tests on CM4000, since it lacks an EPD test feature. > >Sigh. from my perspective, after playing hundreds of games vs both on the various chess servers, cm5000 plays better than hiarcs against Crafty. Of course, CM5000 is more tactical than hiarcs, and maybe the faster search in Crafty makes this tactical difference between hiarcs and CM5000 more important. But if you play an extended match crafty vs hiarcs, and crafty vs cm5000, IMHO CM5000 will win more games than hiarcs... *against* crafty...
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.