Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 10:13:37 08/24/05
Go up one level in this thread
On August 24, 2005 at 01:42:59, Marc Lacrosse wrote: >On August 23, 2005 at 22:00:47, A. Cozzie wrote: > >>>zappa (1.0) was a big disappointment for all (and was in not a single test able >to enter the top ten). >> >>I would tend to disagree here. For example, Zappa 1.0 running in 32 bit mode >>(60% slower than the real version) and with a total shit random book already got >>7th place in WBEC. So I think that Zappa 1.0 when run on a 64-bit computer is >>already about the same strength as Gandalf 6 at 40/40 on good hardware. >> >>anthony > >Maybe, maybe not : > > >http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/rangliste.html >(40+40) >33 Zappa 2571 >09 Gandalf 2660 >03 Fruit21 2713 > >http://www.computerschach.de/index.php?option=com_wrapper&wrap=erangliste&Itemid=152 >: >(10 min + 10 sec) >24 Zappa 1.0 2557 >11 Gandalf 6.0 2650 >02 Fruit 2.1 2755 > >http://www.sedatchess.cjb.net/ >(15 min +5) >22 Zappa 2596 >10 Gandalf 6.01 2660 >02 Fruit 2.1 2783 > >Marc Were any of those computer systems running in 64 bit mode?
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.