Author: Jeremiah Penery
Date: 16:16:34 10/13/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 13, 2002 at 19:03:39, Mike S. wrote: >On October 13, 2002 at 18:24:58, Deepak Nityanandam wrote: > >>During Dr Hsu's chat he said that the DB2 programmers didnt even consider DF >>for benchmarking purposes as they thought it was "way to weak" to play against >>DB2. > >Maybe in 1997. But now as it's clear (or fairly clear...) that Deep Blue's >typical depth of "11(6)" did NOT mean 11 + 6 of nominal depth, but a depth of 11 >and a *maximum* of 6 plies in the hardware for quiesence search (I hope I got >that right, finally), it seems obvious that Fritz has become stronger than Deep >Blue was. And most probably some other programs too, which are of similar >strength like Fritz 7. > >It has been reported that Deep Fritz in Bahrain reaches a depth of 16 or 17 (I >can't remember exactly and where I read it) in the middlegame. > >Also, even on single cpu running at 1,2 GHz, Fritz 7 reaches "base" depths of >15...16 in a few minutes, and selective depths of more than 40! It was said that >Deep Blue II had much more knowledge in the evals (than used today), but can >that compensate for ~4...5 additional plies? In general, I don't think so. Chessmaster searches _far_ less deeply than Fritz if you try to count plies that way, but I wouldn't say Chessmaster is all that much weaker than Fritz.
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.