Computer Chess Club Archives

Search

Messages

Subject: Re: CM6000 is better than CM5500, but is it better than CM5555(settings)?

Author: Bertil Eklund

Date: 06:11:28 01/30/99

Go up one level in this thread

On January 30, 1999 at 06:52:13, Reynolds Takata wrote:

>CM6000 is better than CM5500, but is it better than CM5555(settings)?  I'm not
>sure it is.
Yes it is 40/2h. It is our intention to include CM6000 on our list.
We use 16mb hash and CM6000.obk.
Mr de Koning told us that 16mb should be more than enough, because CM6000 is a
very slow program. He also recommended the original settings. 32mb could make
the program slightly slower. For shorter time-controls he recommended smaller
hash-tables.

Greetings Bertil!

• Re: CM6000 is better than CM5500, but is it better than CM5555(settings)? Harald Faber 05:17:15 02/01/99
  • Re: CM6000 is better than CM5500, but is it better than CM5555(settings)? Bertil Eklund 12:20:48 02/01/99
    • Re: CM6000 is better than CM5500, but is it better than CM5555(settings)? John Merlino 13:36:40 02/01/99
      • Re: CM6000 is better than CM5500, but is it better than CM5555(settings)? blass uri 15:27:34 02/01/99
        • Re: CM6000 is better than CM5500, but is it better than CM5555(settings)? John Merlino 11:38:42 02/02/99
• Re: CM6000 is better than CM5500, but is it better than CM5555(settings)? James Robertson 08:35:55 01/30/99
  • Re: CM6000 is better than CM5500, but is it better than CM5555(settings)? blass uri 10:04:02 01/30/99

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.