Author: William H Rogers
Date: 11:33:29 06/20/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 20, 2001 at 14:25:03, John Hatcher wrote: >Maybe the answer to my question is obvious, but I'd be interested in what >programmers have to say on the subject. > >I've recently been running matches between Fritz6 and Chess Tiger. On my old >Celeron 333mhz computer Fritz6 runs at about 250 knps, and Chess Tiger runs at >about 80-100 knps. To my delight, and surprise, Chess Tiger is doing very well >against Fritz - very well. > >Since, as I understand it, "nps" is related (at least nominally) to search depth >in a given time period, it would seem that, all things being equal, the greater >the "nps" the stronger the program. > >Of course, things are never really equal between two programs. As evidence of >that, Chess Tiger with its lower nps holds its own quite nicely against Fritz. >For this to happen it would seem that Chess Tiger must have some chess >"knowledge" programmed into it that allows it go toe-to-toe with a program that >searches 2.5x as many positions per second. > >Is the programming of this chess knowledge, even among the programmers of top >commercial programs, still as much art as science so that the programmer of >Chess Tiger has found a "smarter", more efficient way to implement chess >knowledge into Chess Tiger. I guess I supposed that much of this knowledge >would be common currency by now. > >Sorry for the long-winded question. I wanted to be clear. > >JOHN Chess knowledge is the art and not all programs count nps the same way. Bill
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.