Author: Thomas Lagershausen
Date: 05:07:59 04/08/01
Go up one level in this thread
>>>Here is my guess for the evidence. >>> >>>Gambit1 is probably not better than Deep Fritz on one processor based on Enrique >>>results. >> >>Enrique played 40/40 games.The programs have their own evidence on different >>timecontrols.One example.DeepFritz is on 5min/game 150 Elo Points stronger than >>DeepShredder, on timecontrol 40/120 DeepShredder is 50-70 Elo points stronger >>than DeepFritz.Can you explain that? > >I do not believe it. >I believe that Deep Fritz is better than Deep Shredder in all time controls. > >Deep Fritz is winning Shredder5 at 2 hours per move. >see http://www.icdchess.com/forums/1/message.shtml?162151 Uri you are a computerchessexpert.But to come with only one game is not a strong argument.Is phalanx stronger than Fritz because he can win some games against Fritz? Why is Shredder winning every official tournament(40/120)and DeepFritz placed behind Shredder? I would say DeepFritz is the best speedchess progam of the world but on tournamenttimecontrols it´s only number three. > >> >>>Gambit2 is not more than 70 elo better than Gambit1 based on the claims on Rebel >>>sites(I assume at most 50 elo from improving the engine and at most 20 elo from >>>tablebases). >>> >>>It means that Gambit on the same hardware is at most 70 elo better than Deep >>>Fritz. >> >>On tournament timecontrol i would say 100 Elo.See my argumentation before. > >I disagree and I believe that christophe also does not believe it.Mmmm, i would say playing against humans i think Christophe had a onother opinion.And on the long way he is right.Against humans you can´t make position blunders. > >>> >>>I guess that 8*700 is at least 4000 in computer chess and it is more than 3 >>>times faster than Gambit on P1333 >>> >>>being 3 times faster is supposed to give more than 70 elo so it means that Deep >>>fritz in 8 processors is better than Gambit on one processor. >> >>You agree with me that Gambit Tiger 2.0 plays moves in almost every game that >>DeepFritz didn´t find in 100 hours computing.So where is your logic? > >I believe that part of these moves are bad moves. >I also think that Deep Fritz can find moves that Gamnittiger will not play even >in 100 hours. Shure a part will be worser but Gambit Tiger has not this normal weaknesses of computerprograms that other programes have.He plays no stupid waitingmoves.He is every time looking for a plan, he is able to play a real kingsattack and something more.The days of a higher level of chess are rising for the programs. > >I guess that Gambittiger2 is better than Deep Fritz but I do not guess that the >difference is getting bigger when the time control is slower. Kramnik couldn´t find a weak point in his play, that´s the point. > >Regards, >Uri Best Thomas
This page took 0.01 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.