Author: Chris King
Date: 16:22:26 06/13/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 13, 2001 at 18:44:33, Chris King wrote: >On June 13, 2001 at 18:23:03, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On June 13, 2001 at 17:40:07, James T. Walker wrote: >> >>>On June 13, 2001 at 16:05:55, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On June 13, 2001 at 15:59:04, Peter Ackermann wrote: >>>> >>>>>If I compare the March-01-edition and the June-01-edition I see that not a >>>>>single game was played with Hiarcs 7.32 for three month now. Both lists show >>>>>Hiarcs 7.32 with 679 games. >>>>>Is Hiarcs 7.32 not attractive anymore? I myself consider Hiarcs 7.32. still one >>>>>of the very interesting engines and if I try engine-matches between the Tigers >>>>>ans Hiarcs it is not so a clear result..... I have the impression that Gambit >>>>>Tiger has some problems with the style of Hiarcs 7.32. So please give Hiarcs >>>>>7.32 a chance from time to time even if Hiarcs 8 seems to be on the way. >>>>> >>>>>Peter >>>> >>>>What is your hardware and what is the time control of your game? >>>> >>>>It is important because Hiarcs7.32 does not like the K6-450 of the ssdf and I >>>>also believe that it prefers also fast time control and not 2 hours/40 moves. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>Hello Uri, >>>I have seen post by you before like this and I don't agree. I would like to >>>know where you get your information. >> >>The fact that hiarcs does not like the ssdf hardware is known. >>I was careful to say "I believe" so I may be wrong and it is based on my >>impression from analyzing some engine-engine games and also on the fact that >>I found from my experience that hiarcs has a bad branching factor at long time >>control. >> >>Another reason that expect Hiarcs to suffer at long time control is the fact >>that hiarcs cannot search more than 30-32 plies forward when the time control is >>not important(I understand that it is going to be fixed in Hiarcs8). >> >> I'm still running Hiarcs 7.32 on my Athlon >>>900 mhz machines and it still does very well against other top programs. For >>>instance in my "standard" database (G/60 or longer) Hiarcs 7.32 is right now >>>ranked tied for 6 place with Chess Tiger 13.0. It is behind Gambit Tiger >>>14.0,Chess Tiger 13.0, Deep Shredder and Fritz 6e/6b. This puts it ahead of >>>programs like Gambit Tiger 1.0, Shredder 5, CM8K(32M), Junior 6.0 and Rebel >>>Century 3.0. This is not a huge database. It has only 694 games but so far I >>>see nothing to indicate Hiarcs does not compete with the faster hardware/longer >>>time controls. >> >>This data does not contradict or prove the conjecture that hiarcs is better in >>blitz on the same hardware. >> >>The only way to test if it is worse at long time control is by comparing >>hiarcs7.32's result in blitz with the results of it at longer time control on >>the same hardware. >> >>Using the same hardware is important. >> >>The reason is that I believe that hiarcs likes the fast hardware more than other >>programs(my experience is that for Hiarcs PIII800 is more than 2 times faster >>than pIII450 when it is not the case for Deep Fritz). >> >>Uri > > >On a 1ghz Athlon Hiarcs 7.32 appears to be only about 34 points behind Fritz 6 >at 5 minute blitz. > > > > > > Program Elo + - Games Score Av.Op. > > 1 Gambit Tiger 2.0 : 2665 25 29 496 64.3 % 2563 > 2 Chess Tiger 14.0 : 2655 29 32 376 64.0 % 2555 > 3 Fritz 6 : 2627 16 19 1264 63.9 % 2528 > 4 Hiarcs 7.32 : 2593 16 18 1250 60.9 % 2517 > 5 Junior 6.0 : 2563 19 18 1172 54.9 % 2529 > 6 Nimzo 8 : 2537 19 16 1250 52.3 % 2521 > 7 Fritz 5.32 : 2537 39 33 276 55.1 % 2502 > 8 The King 3.12 : 2534 42 55 156 48.1 % 2547 > 9 Crafty 18.08 : 2530 19 16 1210 53.0 % 2509 > 10 Junior 5.0 : 2522 38 31 304 53.3 % 2499 > 11 Fritz 4.01 : 2515 56 43 128 57.0 % 2466 > 12 Hiarcs 6.0 : 2509 45 36 216 53.7 % 2483 > 13 Fritz 5.00 : 2496 58 45 128 53.9 % 2469 > 14 Junior 4.6 : 2466 38 46 216 47.5 % 2484 > 15 Fritz 3.10 : 2459 46 60 128 47.7 % 2475 > 16 Hiarcs 4.0 : 2446 39 43 216 44.2 % 2487 > 17 Comet B32 : 2428 22 22 756 41.4 % 2489 > 18 Doctor? 3.0 : 2382 29 30 412 42.0 % 2438 > 19 InmiChess3.06N : 2319 38 27 394 32.9 % 2443 > 20 EXchess 3.14 : 2293 41 25 412 29.4 % 2445 > 21 Fritz 1.20 : 2278 77 42 128 21.1 % 2507 > 22 Faile 1.4.4 : 2152 66 21 412 14.7 % 2458 > 23 BamBam : 2149 69 21 412 14.4 % 2458 > >CK For longer time controls please see:- http://www.elhchess.demon.co.uk/ehss.htm http://www.geocities.com/chessfun_1999/rating.html These both indicate a difference of 30 or 40 points between Hiarcs 7.32 and Fritz 6. The SSDF list indicates about 100 point difference. So it would seem that Hiarcs does benefit from a faster computer. CK
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.