Author: Albert Silver
Date: 14:25:41 11/01/04
Go up one level in this thread
On November 01, 2004 at 15:26:57, Mark R. Anderson wrote:
>Albert,
>
>I have a PIV 3.6 ghz, and have never had an AMD machine. However, I've always
>heard that AMD is a lot faster for chess. It seemed to me that since Tiger was
>on the Athlon machine, it was probably getting a bit of a speed boost. Perhaps
>I was wrong. Sorry.
>
>Mark Anderson
Well, I have an Athlon 2400XP+ and have no complaints, but have no access to the
two processors in question. Pete Skinner says the AMD is faster, and I can't
comment frankly. I wouldn't knock CT2004 too quickly in any case. Blitz is just
blitz, and losing some games to Shredder 8 doesn't mean much either. Shredder 8
isn't king of the comp-comp hill for no reason after all. And if it isn't as
strong as Theron would like, maybe a patch will come out who can say? Remember
that every Fritz since Fritz 6 has had X patches and upgrades. Even Shredder 6
and 7 had an upgrade via patch.
Albert
>
>On November 01, 2004 at 08:58:38, Albert Silver wrote:
>
>>On November 01, 2004 at 06:13:10, Mark R. Anderson wrote:
>>
>>>Peter,
>>>
>>>Yes, Hiarcs is known to be a good at blitz, but what's worse for Tiger here is
>>>that Tiger was playing with a hardware speed advantage and still lost badly.
>>
>>Err, you mean the opposite no doubt. Hiarcs had the hardware advantage.
>>
>>>>Hiarcs 9 used a PIV 2.0Ghz 128M hash tables.
>>>>Chess Tiger was on an Athlon 1800+ 96M hash tables.
>>
>> Albert
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.