Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 16:41:04 05/27/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 27, 2001 at 16:55:02, Ian Osgood wrote:
>On May 25, 2001 at 04:29:36, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On May 25, 2001 at 01:29:11, Mike S. wrote:
>>
>>>On May 24, 2001 at 22:42:28, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>>
>>>>(...)
>>>>>On May 24, 2001 at 22:05:42, william penn wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>i hear that palm tiger beat chess genius, i thought this was a hand held stand
>>>>>>alone, if so it must be much stronger than the sapphire which i thought was the
>>>>>>strongest standalone computer available. (...)
>>>
>>>>This is mostly right, Michael, but let me add some infos:
>>>>
>>>>Chess Tiger for Palm is COMPLETE port of Chess Tiger 14.1 (which is an evolution
>>>>of the Chess Tiger 14 program currently sold by Shröder BV under the name
>>>>Rebel-Tiger, by ChessBase under the name Chess Tiger, and by Convekta in their
>>>>ChessAssistant 6.0 product).
>>>>
>>>>The Chess Tiger engine running in the Palm has ALL the knowledge and algorithms
>>>>of Chess Tiger 14.1 for PC, everything but the endgame tablebases (for obvious
>>>>reasons).
>>>>
>>>>(...)
>>>
>>>I think it would be interesting to see if Palm Tiger is able to win a longer
>>>match against the NOVAG Sapphire II (I would expect that, but the Sapphire has
>>>proven superior so far against other handhelds or travel computers, according to
>>>info I have read from various sources).
>>>
>>>I wouldn't be surprised if the result would be quite narrow though...
>>
>>
>>I really don't know and I would really like to know.
>>
>>The Sapphire II is rated 2012 by the SSDF (that means 2112 in the previous
>>versions of the list, which is more accurate for lower ratings).
>>
>>So normally Tiger for Palm should be able to at least equal the Sapphire.
>
>So far, my Sapphire II has 2.5 - 0.5 against Palm Tiger at 5 minute games.
>Tiger is overclocked to 28MHz on a Palm IIIe, both have hash tables on,
>permanent brain disabled. Looks like the Sapphire II is out thinking Palm Tiger
>by about a ply (3000 nps vs 500 nps).
Tiger is not comfortable with games in 5 minutes on the Palm. That's too fast
for my search algorithms.
That's something I'll work on, but until I manage to improve on this, I would
advice to play longer games to get more significant results.
> I plan to try some 30 minute games with
>permanent brain later this week. (This would be easier if Palm Tiger had some
>sort of serial interface so that I could adapt it to WinBoard like I have my
>Sapphire II.)
Unfortunately I'm not planning to work on this. Too few people would be
interested in this. You would need to own two Palms, or a Palm and a compatible
device (Sapphire?), that would attract probably no more than 10 customers. Too
much work for too little interest.
>>>I think the Sapphire II could act as a kind of basic performance test for Palm
>>>chess programs, in other words, they should beat it more or less clearly to be
>>>competitive IMO, in terms of strength (in terms of functionality, the Palm is
>>>certainly superior).
>>
>>
>>There are not many chess programs which are going to be able to pass the test!
>>:)
>
>Indeed. People forget that the SapphireII is near state of the art at its clock
>speed (16MHz). Lang's and Morsch's programs in Mephisto units are its only
>competitors.
I do not know if the Sapphire processor can do more MIPS than the Palm's
DragonBall. Anybody has info on this?
I know the DragonBall takes a lot of clock cycles to process only one
instruction, and I remember the Sapphire has some kind of RISC processor in it.
Right?
>>>A Pocket PC, or Windows CE program running at 100...200 MHz just must beat the
>>>Sapphire I think... at least if it is somewhat state of the art.
>>
>>
>>Clearly. The Sapphire should be wiped away by a decent chess program running on
>>StrongARM at 100 or even 200MHz.
>>
>>
>>
>> Christophe
>
>However, that program must be well written. For example, the strongest
>commercial program for the PocketPC, PalmChess, on a 206MHz iPAQ loses (~35%)
>against ChessGenius on a 28Mhz overclocked Palm. It would certainly lose
>against SapphireII which is stronger.
>
>Crafty on the iPAQ is stronger than the SapphireII (hash tables help quite a
>bit.)
The difference in processor speed between the Sapphire and the StrongARM
screams.
Christophe
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.