Author: James T. Walker
Date: 10:07:55 03/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On March 20, 2002 at 10:26:08, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >On March 20, 2002 at 09:43:45, James T. Walker wrote: > >>On March 20, 2002 at 06:24:14, Steve Maughan wrote: >> >>>The version of HIARCS used is the new one - HIARCS 8, which may well be up with >>>the top engines. It has been planned for release any time now. According to >>>sources close to HIARCS the ChessBase company rates the new HIARCS engine second >>>only to Fritz 7. We'll have to see but it has been a while since HIARCS 7.32 >>>was launched (May 99) and Mark Uniacke could have made quite a bit of progress >>>in the last three years. >>> >>>Steve >> >>" ChessBase company rates the new HIARCS engine second only to Fritz 7." >> >>That's interesting. I didn't know that. I think it's funny since I rate Fritz >>7 second only to Chess Tiger 14.0. Never the less, I'm looking forward to the >>new Hiarcs. >>Jim > >Chesstiger 14.0 is very strong, but all my testings and others i have seen too, >indicates that Fritz 7b is actually the strongest of the two. > >Regards >Jonas Hello Jonas, You may be right but, I believe most of the testing you are referring to was done on one computer with ponder off. In my opinion the only thing you prove with this setup is which is stronger in this setup. This setup is not a "real world" situation. No programs actually compete this way except in these home test. I am basically referring to "Blitz" time controls since that is where I have the most "experience". In my database Chess Tiger 14.0 is still about 8 points ahead of Fritz 7 and both have played 1300/1400 + games vs various opponents using two Athlon computers/auto232. In my "Action" database which is mostly game/25 or game/30 minutes Chess Tiger is leading Fritz 7 by 19 ELO but I have less than 200 games each. In my "Standard" database Fritz 7 is leading CT 14 by more than 50 points but again I only have150/200 games each. These databases where the number of games is low is very volatile since the next series of games by either program tends to change the rating by fairly large amounts. Basically I'm leaving the "longer" time control testing up to SSDF since they can do much more than I can. The bottom line for me is that they are so close that we may never know for sure which is strongest. But it's OK for us to have different opinions and its understandable since we have different experiences. Regards, Jim
This page took 0.01 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.