Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:39:35 08/12/05
Go up one level in this thread
On August 12, 2005 at 01:59:30, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 11, 2005 at 20:57:09, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On August 11, 2005 at 14:37:56, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On August 11, 2005 at 14:00:24, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On August 11, 2005 at 13:57:36, Madhavan wrote: >>>> >>>>>On August 11, 2005 at 13:53:37, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On August 11, 2005 at 12:55:10, Thorsten Czub wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>1. Fruit >>>>>>>2. Shredder >>>>>>>3. Junior >>>>>>>4. Crafty >>>>>>>5. Zappa >>>>>>>6. Diep >>>>>>>7. Sjeng >>>>>>>8. Jonny >>>>>>>9. IsiChess >>>>>>>10. My_fute >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>That will be a miracle. A single opteron CPU (single core) is 2x as fast as a >>>>>>3.0ghz pentium. I, at least, will be running on 8 of 'em. That is a tough >>>>>>disadvantage to overcome... >>>>> >>>>>Don't forget Fruit beta has got another 100 elo improvement. >>>> >>>> >>>>Doesn't matter at all. a speed advantage of 16x is huge. Not insurmountable, >>>>but _huge_ and very difficult to overcome. >>> >>>I guess that it does not gives more than 150-200 elo improvement because of >>>diminishing return that means that being twice faster give only 40-50 elo >>>improvement at long time control and not 70 elo. >>> >>>It seems that public fruit is about 150-200 elo better than public Crafty. >>>I expect both WCCC fruit and WCCC Crafty to be better than the public version so >>>it seems to me that fruit and Crafty have equal chances. >>> >>>Maybe Crafty has better chances because you could learn from Fruit's evaluation >>>so you improved Crafty more than Fabien improved Fruit but only you can tell if >>>looking at the source of fruit helped you to improve Crafty. >> >>That I can answer easily. I've not looked at the source of fruit. So there's >>no way it could have helped. In fact, I haven't even seen a game fruit vs >>crafty so I have no idea how the thing plays. > >I think that it is better if you look at the code because it probably can help >you to find better ideas to improve crafty. > ><snipped> >>Simple. Every year, every new version, "the new version is 60-80-100 elo >>stronger than last year's version." Seen that over and over and over. :) > >For fruit it is correct so far and there is more than one version per year. >Note that I do not expect fruit of today to be 100 elo better than Fruit2.1 >because 2 months is too early for 100 elo improvement but I certainly expect 100 >elo improvement in fruit to happen in less than a year because Fabien is better >programmer than the programmers of the commercial programs(I also expect part of >the commercial to improve faster thanks to learning from fruit). > >Fruit2.1 is from 17.6.2005 >Fruit2.0 is from 24.12.2004 >Fruit1.5 is from 17.06.2004 >Fruit1.0 is from 17.03.2004 > >Based on different lists I find more than 100 elo difference between Fruit2.1 >and Fruit2.0 and I remember similiar improvement with older versions of Fruit. > >You can say that it was not hard to improve old versions before Fruit2.0 but >Fruit2.0 is already better than the public version of Crafty on one cpu and >Fruit still has search bugs that fabien did not fix. > >Here are 2 rating lists when both fruit2.1 and fruit2.0 have more than 1000 >games: > >http://www.miko42.de/turniere/blitzturniere/blitzrangliste.html > >Fruit2.1 2712 >Fruit2.0 2608 > >http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/rangliste.html > >Fruit2.1 2713 >Fruit2.0 2607 > >Uri That's all well and good, but also a different topic. Almost _any_ engine progresses by leaps and bounds the first year or two or three, assuming it was a "start from scratch" project. But once it incorporates most of the known ideas, progress starts to slow down...
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.