Author: Mike S.
Date: 13:00:55 07/13/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 13, 2001 at 00:38:43, Robert Hyatt wrote: >(...) >This is a very sensitive part of all chess engines. I believe mine does worse >tactically than most others. Because I rely a lot on hardware to help with >tactics, Crafty generally does poorly when compared to other programs on equal >hardware... > >Every program will have a few positions it does well on, and a few it does >poorly on. Fritz has more of the former than the latter. Crafty is the >opposite, in general. My impression is, that Crafty is more than competitive compared to Fritz and other top engines, in terms of tactical speed. Maybe Fritz solves some more within blitz time ranges, but Crafty looks like a solid "finder" when given longer time of some minutes. My test contains mostly positions with easy to medium difficulty (by today's standards), and I've tested on single cpu always. I don't know if I would come to another conclusion, if I would use a lot of extremely difficult positions only... I doubt that this is better to predict the strength in practical play, compared to tests with a "bandwith" (but those cannot predict it either anyway :o). Regards, M.Scheidl Btw. I think programs are still not obliged to announce any # in 10 under standard time conditions (I'd expect any # in 5, and most # in 6). Maybe we can add one move for 40/2h on fast computers. Not talking of database endgame positions of course, or of positions near of that.
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.