Author: Peter Berger
Date: 16:15:06 12/26/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 26, 2003 at 15:46:53, Uri Blass wrote: >On December 26, 2003 at 15:34:43, Darren Rushton wrote: > >>>Actually what happens, is the 366 is SLOW. And I mean SLOW. >> >>I don't intend to be controversial here, but the conclusion I draw from your >>results is that Shredder 7 is such a brilliant program it is almost a match for >>the one of the better amateur programs on hardware that's almost 10 times >>slower. >> >>Regards, >> >>Darren > >I do not think that this is the conclusion. > >It is already known that Junior8 almost beated Crafty with 10:1 hardware >advantage in peter berger's experiment. > >It was slightly older Crafty but Shredder7.04 is probably better than Junior8 >based on the ssdf list and >the hardware difference is smaller than the difference in Junior-Crafty so I >expected based on the result of Junior-Crafty a slightly better result for >shredder and the result can be seen as a small disappointment for shredder. > >Uri I think there is nothing wrong with Darren's conclusion at all (error margins left aside), it's logical. But I agree there might be more to it. Although there is *so* little data to draw conclusions from, we can always make wild guesses ;). Junior might be better suited for this kind of challenge than Shredder, and in fact I personally really do think so. One reason might be that Shredder relies on search more heavily, but I better stop *now*, before I start claiming things I will never find the time to test. 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.