Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Chess Tiger 14.9(a) on Palm Vx - Genius 4 on 486dx-50 0.5-11.5

Author: Peter Berger

Date: 04:36:24 06/15/02

Go up one level in this thread


On June 15, 2002 at 07:02:34, Thorsten Czub wrote:

>Hi Peter,
>
>a 486-50 mhz is as fast as a TASC R40
>or a chessmachine 32 Mhz.
>
>maybe faster than the sparc module for saitek.
>only when the sparc runs at high speed,
>it could be as strong.
>
>the palm is only 68020 level.
>when you want to relate that against each other,
>the 486 is IMO too fast.
>
>the advantage the pc program has due to the faster cpu is
>IMO too big.
>
>it would be the same with trying to play roma
>or vancouver 68020 against 486 PC Tiger.
>this would be as senseless.
>
>the level of a 486-33 is nearly as strong as
>Mephisto RISC 1MB with schröder program
>or Tasc chessmachine 16 mhz.

Hi Thorsten,

thanks for your impressions about hardware differences, especially when it is
about the 68020, RISC or Tasc I am not familiar with.

The somewhere around 4-6 speed difference factor is the best I could come up
with so far and Christophe doesn't disagree.

This Tiger-Genius match makes more sense when you know its history IMHO.

Does it make sense to compair chessplaying entities when there is a huge
hardware difference ?

I tried this experiment : http://f11.parsimony.net/forum16635/messages/24006.htm
.Just look at the hardware difference - Tiger played on the Palm Vx , the
opponents on an Athlon 1333 !!!

But then compair the results from Chess Tiger 14.6 with 14.9 against these
opponents. This is exactly the improvement you would expect, isn't it? So a
hardware difference isn't a problem per se.

Then I played two matches with exactly the same conditions as in the Genius
match against Yace and Comet.

Tiger - Comet 4.5-7.5
Tiger - Yace  5.5-6.5

Again - as the opponents ( not the hardware) were close enough in playing
strengths you get meaningful results IMHO.

So the Tiger-Genius match was the next logical step. The results show that
either Genius is stronger on this hardware than expected - or that the
experiment suddenly shows an unexpected flaw.

I hope it is easier to understand the reason for this match now. Testing
opponent s against each other where one scores 11.5-0.5 usually makes very
little sense, agreed. The result was more extreme than I would have expected.
But I don't think the hardware difference is a general problem at all.

Kind regards,
Peter



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.