Author: stuart taylor
Date: 15:10:19 10/31/05
Go up one level in this thread
On October 31, 2005 at 17:58:04, Joachim Rang wrote: >On October 31, 2005 at 17:33:36, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On October 31, 2005 at 17:10:10, William Kerr wrote: >> >>>Hi, >>> >>>If you had the choice of running one top program on a CPU that ran at 3x speed >>>or three different top programs each running on one CPU at x speed. Which would >>>be better for analysis or game play. In the 2nd case one could vote on the >>>choice of move if two out of three programs pick the same move. >> >>Take the scenario with three engines and run it three times as long. Then you >>have the best of both worlds (long time analysis and different opinions as >>well). >> >>As for your original problem: >>Sometimes the first will be better and sometimes the second. > >I would always opt for the second for analysis. One engine is not capable of >understanding all positions of chess (even not Fruit) ;-). I prefer to go into >the variations and see how the different engines "react". That gives me soon a >clue which engine has the best perspective and I can set up a long time >analysis. > >Joachim I really wonder if 3 is much better than one, for ideas. A human might be able to have greater ideas, which MAY occasionaly work after exhaustive analysis. Best is to keep them all running on fastest computers for atleast 2 days (48 hours)each, then one of them MIGHT start thinking of any great move under the sun. S.Taylor
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.