Author: Thorsten Czub
Date: 08:22:05 10/15/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 15, 2003 at 11:11:34, Peter Skinner wrote: >Other programs like Crafty, Ruffian, Gandalf do indeed profit more from better >hardware. I just don't think that Tiger is one of them. This could possibly be >the reason for Christophe's thoughts on the time control difference. > >Peter. it has to do with HOW the programs work. some programs get most of their strength by coming deep. those programs run good on slow hardware AND on fast hardware. Tiger is a good example. There are other programs that get most of their strength by getting everything evaluated accurate. they do not come deep very fast. they need a kind of PLATFORM to reach. When they reached this platform they play good. it now depends if the pc has the speed to let the program reach this or the time control is long enough. e.g. you give fritz and rebel 2 seconds to think. in most of the cases fritz is deeper in search then rebel. i guess in most of the cases fritz is stronger when having 2 seconds. now you give both programs 2 minutes. and the situataion is different. in many cases rebel will have the better moves. not because it comes deeper than fritz. but because it came deep enough not to blunder and used more sophisticated evaluations to find the better move.
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.