Author: Uri Blass
Date: 02:22:27 01/05/05
Go up one level in this thread
On January 05, 2005 at 03:34:13, Kunnar Klauks wrote: >On January 04, 2005 at 14:01:13, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On January 04, 2005 at 13:58:38, Dann Corbit wrote: >> >>>AMD 2.2 GHz 64 bit Athlon, 10'+10" >>> >>> Program Elo + - Games Score Av.Op. Draws >>>1 Fruit_20 : 2654 244 142 10 65.0 % 2546 50.0 % >>>2 Ruffian_101 : 2546 142 244 10 35.0 % 2654 50.0 % >> >>AMD Athlon 950 MHz, 10'+10" >> Program Elo + - Games Score Av.Op. Draws >>1 Ruffian_101 : 2600 239 239 10 50.0 % 2600 20.0 % >>2 Fruit_20 : 2600 239 239 10 50.0 % 2600 20.0 % > >Interesting. I remember ruffian 1.0.1 was considered stronger than crafty, now >fruit is winning ruffian. Does it mean Fruit might be strongest open source >engine now, since its GPL? And maybe even strongest engine in linux, since it >appears to run in linux also? I understand of course that not much games were >played, but still. Anyway, i will test this engine against crafty as soon as i >get time for it. I think that it is hard to compare. Fruit has probably better evaluation and better search than Crafty but Crafty has better opening book and learning(fruit has no opening book and no learning). I think that giving fruit an external book is not fair because opening book is part of the code of Crafty when fabian did not write code for opening book. Fruit also does not support parallel search and the code of Crafty support more than one processor. Not using more than one processor for crafty gives fruit unfair advantage because it is possible that Bob Hyatt could do better by spending less time on supporting more than one processor. Uri
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.