Author: Richard A. Fowell
Date: 22:34:42 01/01/05
Go up one level in this thread
Is the 970 the "G4" or "G5"? I have a G4. -Richard On January 01, 2005 at 09:35:10, William Bryant wrote: >On December 31, 2004 at 23:42:59, Richard A. Fowell wrote: > >>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 > >Richard, > >I will be glad to send you a binary of Crafty 19.17 optomized for the 970. >I can get 3M NPS when run of a duel platform. >I runs as a UNIX process (from the terminal). > >Let me know if you would like me to eMail ti to you. > >William
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.