Author: Peter Berger
Date: 08:42:25 05/11/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 11, 2001 at 10:40:24, Roland Pfister wrote: >I had Patzer run over night with 16 minutes per position >on a Piii-450, 32MB Hash. > >1. Qb3 0 4:34 >2. Bc8 4 0:09 >3. Nh6 4 0:00 >4. b4 0 - >5. e5 4 0:01 >6. Bxc3 4 0:00 >7. Rfb8 1 1:25 >8. d5 0 - >9. Nd4 4 0:01 >10. a4 4 0:04 >11. d5 4 0:03 >12.Bxf7 4 0:00 >13.Nxe4? 4 0:01 >14.Nxc4? 0 10:25 >15. exf6 4 0:00 >16. d5 4 0:01 >17.hxg4? 4 0:00 >18. Bxf6 0 - >19. Bxe6 0 - >20. Ndb5 3 0:21 >21.Kxe6? 4 0:00 >22. a4 0 - >23. Bxh7 4 0:01 >24. Nxe5 4 0:09 >25.Qxb3? 4 0:00 > >That is 68 points. > >if it would have run with half speed, it would have found >4 points less, with quarter speed, 8 points less. > >if it would have run with double speed, 2 points more, >with 4fold speed 4 points more Thanks for posting your results - as expected Patzer did well . I have done a few similar experiments with different speeds during the last nights and have got similar results for other programs ( those that can eat and spit EPD ). As soon as the programs are good enough ( or the hardware fast enough ) the tactical ones will be solved - that's the reason all of the programs are so close together now IMHO . I am surprised Patzer needs _that_ long to avoid Nxc4 in CCR 14 . What's left are the positional ones - and they are quite search-resistent : good result in CCR 7 for Patzer I think . Btw , I think CCR 8 isn't exactly a good test . The only program I have seen that played it with the right plan of Nf5 was Chess Tiger 14.0 - all the others might play Bxf6 , or just as well Nxc6 as most of them planned to trade both pieces anyway ( that's luck ) . Cheers. pete
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.