Author: Buchmann Patrick
Date: 12:19:13 02/10/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 10, 2004 at 08:12:15, Drexel,Michael wrote: >On February 09, 2004 at 17:05:51, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On February 09, 2004 at 06:07:12, Drexel,Michael wrote: >> >>>On February 09, 2004 at 05:27:35, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>> >>>>On February 09, 2004 at 04:53:36, Drexel,Michael wrote: >>>> >>>>>On February 09, 2004 at 04:27:43, Jorge Pichard wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>The match was done using an Athlon 1.2 GHz with 256 MB and each program was >>>>>>using its own setting from factory. I know that 30 games are not enough games to >>>>>>make aconcrete judgement of what program is better but at least I got an idea >>>>>>:-) >>>>> >>>>>Yes, but unfortunately it's the wrong idea. :) >>>> >>>>What is wrong, please be specific ? I am not implying that one program is better >>>>than the other, simply that a match between them indicate that they are of equal >>>>strength. >>>> >>>>Jorge >>> >>>A match can not indicate that. >>>Aristarch is stronger than AnMon. This hasn't changed. >> >>The new AnMon looks like a considerable upgrade from previous versions, >>according to many tests. >> >>I think the jury is still out on which is now stronger. > >IMO there is little doubt. >The previous version was considerably weaker than Aristarch 4.21. >Of course we have only a few results from Aristarch 4.41 and AnMon 5.30 so far: > >http://perso.wanadoo.fr/lefouduroi/tournois/uci/uel_rating.htm Hi Dann, I agree. Look also on tournament on http://perso.wanadoo.fr/lefouduroi/tournois/uci/elite.htm#060204 Regards, Patrick
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.