Author: Uri Blass
Date: 22:19:46 10/21/05
Go up one level in this thread
On October 22, 2005 at 00:59:57, Matthew Hull wrote: >On October 22, 2005 at 00:40:54, Peter Skinner wrote: > >>Hi Uri, >> >>So this is how you would have it: >> >>1 Fruit >>2 ban (Junior) >>3 Hiarcs8x >>4 SpikeX >>5 Crafty >>6 WildCatXX >>7 Amyan >>8 Amateur >>9 PosrModernist >>10 ArasanX >>11 QuarkX >>12 Chessthinker >>13 Tinker >>14 Thono >>15 notalent >>16 Telepath >> >>My only problem is that I think GNUChess on a P4 1.4 Ghz > > >FYI, I think the Pentium M is a Centrino-based chip, which would make it >stronger than a P4 at the same clock speed. But this is a first generation M >chip which is not as fast as later Centrinos (I think). IIRC, it should run >like a PIII at 1.4GHz. I could be wrong though. > >That probably just confuses the issue. :) Not much Thinker hardware is equivalent to 166mhz Pentium based on the author. PIII 1.4Ghz is probably not significantly more than 10 times faster than 166mhz pentium. I know that mhz may be misleading about speed so I even made the assumption that it is 10 times faster for analysis and not less than it inspite of the fact that I guess that less than it is correct. My conclusion is that gnuchess is clearly weaker after considering the hardware differences. Note that in my previous analysis I used thinker4.6c and not thinker4.7 that is also in the aegt list and 8 elo better than 4.6c. I also believe that Thinker5 is significantly stronger than Thinker4.7a based on results in Leo's tournament. Uri
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.