Author: Greg Simpson
Date: 11:53:46 10/03/05
Go up one level in this thread
On October 03, 2005 at 14:15:05, Uri Blass wrote: >On October 03, 2005 at 11:30:07, Greg Simpson wrote: > >>On October 03, 2005 at 10:18:30, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On October 03, 2005 at 10:02:38, Andreas Schwartmann wrote: >>> >>>>I am running a match between Fritz 9 and Fruit 2.2 right now. >>>> >>>>- Hardware: AMD Athon 64 X2 3800+ @ 2300 MHz, 2 GB RAM. >>>>- Hash tables: 512 MB each >>>>- Own books >>>>- Permanent brain (2 CPU system!) >>>>- Time: 60+15 >>>>- Length: 50 games >>>> >>>> >>>>After 42 games, Fruit 2.2 is leading with a powerful 28:14! >>>> >>>>I will publish the games after the 50 games are finished. >>>> >>>>I know that 50 games are not really enough for a clear evaluation of an engine's >>>>playing strength. But it looks like Fruit is the major contender for the #1 spot >>>>on the rating list. >>>> >>>>Andreas >>> >>>I wonder if the reason is not a bad book of Fritz because in CEGT I do not see >>>similiar results. >>> >>>Uri >> >>It's beginning to look like Fritz 9 is more aggressive than the other top >>programs, which is giving it very high scores against weak engines but leaving >>it weaker head-to-head against the very best. > >It may be the case for Fritz with it's own book but Fritz9 in CEGT scored more >than 50% against Fruit2.1 >+18 =18 -17 > >http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn/ranglisteall.html#2 I think you meant more that 50% against Fruit 2.2. There are not enough games against individual opponents to tell much, but the draw percentage is amazingly low.
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.