Author: Steve Glanzfeld
Date: 07:58:17 07/24/05
Go up one level in this thread
On July 24, 2005 at 10:08:41, Kurt Utzinger wrote: >I have > seldom read such nonsense in the same message. And did you notice this: "I decided to put to the test the multi-processor versions of both programs, as that ensures maximum performance. Both programs ran on a Pentium 4, 3.6 GHz VIO notebook (512 Mb RAM, 40 GB HDD) available at your local PC store." He chooses the multi-processor versions, but "ensures maximum performance" by running them on a single cpu notebook. He is very competent - in languages :) but not in computerchess, unfortunately. He ist convinced that Fritz 8 is also better for analysis, but does not mention it's missing backwards capability for interactive analysis. AFAIK Junior 9 is much better at this (I don't have it, but other users said so). Maybe ChessBase wanted to give an example how a "typical user" or normal chessplayer approaches the topic. Maybe they want to test how many complaints it raises ;) IOW how important engine strength comparisons in pure computerchess etc. really are anymore, among the readers of their website. I'm just guessing. Anyway, that article is not quite at the usually higher level of the chessbase.com reports. I would not have published it. Steve
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.