Author: Paul
Date: 18:35:50 04/11/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 11, 2001 at 21:10:45, leonid wrote: >Hi, Paul! > >Genius 2 and Genius 4, for sure, don't care about any fantasy positions, like >this last one. Genius 2 was able to solve every position without any problem. >Genius 2 never did a mistake in any heavy positions that I asked him to solve >and I tried on it more that few handreds. Genius 4 was not that good. In few >positions (in some 25) it was wrong. It could be that it was the first version >for Windows. This is why few bugs jumped inside. It could be that in the next >version (like your version 5) it is already as perfect as I remember for version >2. Genius 4 is more speedy in solving the mates. > >I remember that Genius program was not that speedy but bug free. Rock solid in >everywhere. > >I tried for last position only 4 and 5 moves deep with Genius 2. Pentium 600Mhz. > >4 moves - 11 sec. (mine 0.5 sec by brute force) >5 moves - 12 min. 39. (... 3.9 sec ... ) > >I not went with Genius 2 beyond 5 moves because it looked like for this position >it will be very long. > >This position is 8 moves deep, just like you said. > >And how is Genius 5? > >Did you ever used Genius for verification of mate positions, like I did when I >wrote my mate solver? > >Salut, >Leonid. Yes ... I used the older Geniiii :) a lot when I first bought them, but that's a long time ago, and the only thing I remember now is that they were very good & fast just like you say. But I haven't used them for the last couple of years. And I don't like Genius 5 from what I've seen just now, specifically the processor load is terrible. So that's going to be a deinstall for me! Paul PS: Sorry for missing your post, but CCC is terribly slow from here today.
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.