Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 23:31:44 09/16/01
Go up one level in this thread
On September 17, 2001 at 01:22:41, Uri Blass wrote:
>On September 17, 2001 at 00:17:12, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On September 16, 2001 at 17:35:42, Peter Berger wrote:
>>
>>>On September 16, 2001 at 17:06:14, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>A naive question: why don't you just assume that The King is stronger than
>>>>Shredder instead of calling for some obscure reason related to time controls?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Christophe
>>>>
>>>
>>>He used another ( probably somehow broken) adapter before and got a 17-3 result
>>>for TheKing. Now with a working adapter he gets more realistic results.
>>>
>>>He didn't suggest that either engine is any stronger I think.
>>>
>>>There is no reference to timecontrol at all - it's simply about some broken
>>>Chessbase WinBoard adapter ( and that one definitely really is quite broken ).
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>pete
>>
>>
>>
>>"These results look very realistic since Shredder5 does not feel comfortabel on
>>the slow hardware."
>>
>>This is a direct reference to some hypothetic difference in performance
>>depending on the speed of the computer (which is the same as saying that the
>>programs perform differently depending on the time controls).
>
>It is not the same because it is possible that Shredder earns more speed
>relative to the king from fast hardware.
>
>I did not check it but I know that there are programs that earn more speed from
>fast hardware.
>
>I know that gandalf feels better on fast hardware relative to Junior not because
>of the time control but because it earns more speed from the fast hardware.
>
>Uri
Using time controls twice as long is the same as doubling the computer speed.
Faster hardware or longer time controls, that's the same.
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.