Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Chessmaster 9000 for Macintosh has been released.

Author: Richard A. Fowell

Date: 20:42:59 12/31/04

Go up one level in this thread


On December 31, 2004 at 10:58:33, Roy Eassa wrote:

>On December 30, 2004 at 03:35:13, Richard A. Fowell wrote:
>
>>My copy of Chessmaster 9000 for Macintosh showed up today ( I had pre-ordered it
>>through Amazon.com in the spring). It comes on DVD-ROM (and will not launch
>>without the DVD-ROM in the drive) and requires OS 10.2 as a minimum.
>>
>>Compared to Chessmaster 6000 Mac, the new version:
>>
>>- Runs native in OS X
>>- Has "The King 3.23" (7/7/2002) engine
>>- Apparently has endgame tablebases (though I have yet to get it to use them).
>>
>>Probably a few other things too.
>>
>>-Richard
>
>
>Please let us know how strong it plays, approximately, compared to other Mac
>programs and to Windows programs on similar-speed hardware.

My guess is:

- Chessmaster 9000 is weaker than the imminent HIARCS 9.6 for Mac
   release, but significantly stronger than any other Mac chess engine.

- On similar Windows hardware, several Windows programs are significantly
stronger
   than CM9000 - up to 90 points, in the case of Shredder.

My reasoning:

It is notoriously difficult to measure the strength of chess programs accurately
without
playing a lot of games between them (which I don't plan on).

I'm basing my  my guess based on this month's SSDF rating list.
Here are the 11 "non-sibling" engines on this months SSDF rating list:

      THE SSDF RATING LIST 2004-12-31    100049 games played by  267 computers
                                            Rating   +     -  Games   Won  Oppo
                                            ------  ---   --- -----   ---  ----
1 Shredder 8.0 CB  256MB Athlon 1200 MHz  2805   23   -22  1075   71%  2645
2 Deep Fritz 8.0  256MB Athlon 1200 MHz   2791   25   -24   896   72%  2628
3 Junior 8.0  256MB Athlon 1200 MHz       2772   25   -24   832   66%  2656
4 Gandalf 6.0  256MB  Athlon 1200 MHz     2749   49   -46   225   63%  2658
5 Hiarcs 9.0  256MB Athlon 1200 MHz       2739   22   -21  1068   62%  2656
6 Chess Tiger 2004  256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2723   27   -26   710   59%  2657
7 Chessmaster 9000  256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2717   36   -36   376   55%  2679
8 Rebel 12.0  256MB Athlon 1200 MHz       2684   32   -32   484   57%  2633
9 Ruffian 1.0.1  256MB Athlon 1200 MHz    2675   27   -27   684   52%  2657
10 Deep Sjeng 1.5a  256MB Athlon 1200 MH   2673   31   -31   493   52%  2662
11 Crafty 18.12/CB 256MB  Athlon 1200 MHz 2617   27   -27   687   50%  2617

Of these 11 engines, four are now (or will soon be) available on the Macintosh:

5 Hiarcs 9.0  256MB Athlon 1200 MHz       2739   22   -21  1068   62%  2656
7 Chessmaster 9000  256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2717   36   -36   376   55%  2679
9 Ruffian 1.0.1  256MB Athlon 1200 MHz    2675   27   -27   684   52%  2657
11 Crafty 18.12/CB 256MB  Athlon 1200 MHz 2617   27   -27   687   50%  2617

Two questions about using these results to predict performance on the Macintosh:
- how similar is the chess engine source code between the Mac and Windows
versions?
- how efficiently does the chess engine object code run on Intel vs. PowerPC
CPUs?

In the past, I've probed at these questions by running a problem test like the
LCT-II test
on both platforms. If the results are the same, but the timing is different, I
conclude
that the engines are probably the same, but the CPU efficiency is different.

With respect to the level of similarity:

HIARCS: I would think HIARCS 9.6 is likely to be somewhat stronger than HIARCS
9.0 on Windows:
- HIARCS 9.6 Macintosh is presumably believed stronger than the earlier version
of HIARCS 9.0
- In the past, the chess engine source code for HIARCS has been identical
between Mac and Windows
- In the (quite distant) past, older HIARCS engines had better nps/MHz speed on
PowerPC than Intel

(http://web.archive.org/web/20001118051800/http://gambitsoft.com/chess/games/hiar6me.htm)

Chessmaster 9000
- Both Chessmaster 9000 for PC and for Mac use the "The King 3.23" engine.
- I have no benchmarks comparing "The King's" CPU efficiency between Intel and
Mac.

Ruffian
- The Mac OS/X Version is 2.02, so it may be better than version 1.01 above
- I have no benchmarks comparing Ruffian's CPU efficiency between Intel and Mac.

Crafty
- I think (though I don't have it) Crafty 18.12 has been compiled for the Mac
- CPU benchmarks have indicated Crafty does better on Intel vs. PowerPC CPUs.
   In particular, the spec2000 benchmark 186.crafty runs 30% faster per MHz on
  a 2600 MHz AMD Athlon vs. a 2200  MHz PowerPC 970.

-Richard



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.