Author: enrico carrisco
Date: 12:28:38 11/14/05
Go up one level in this thread
On November 13, 2005 at 08:36:33, Andreas Guettinger wrote: >I see no surprise here. >Reason: Hardware. > >I don't know what hardware is used in Leiden, but I suspect that some of the >opponents of Fruit use powerful Dual or Quad systems. >Fruit is a great engine, and it may dominate the home users tournaments, but in >the _big_ official tourneys againts the multi-threaded engines. Same goes for >Hiarcs10 that performed unexpectedly low in the recent CCT- Blitz tournament. >Great engines, but cannot cope with the hardware dissadvantage. > >I think the time for a single threaded program winning those tourneys is comming >to an end. > >M2C >- Andy Hiarcs' performance in CCT-Blitz was not hardware related. Junior was the only entrant with a relatively fast dual machine (and perhaps Crafty with the Dual Xeon 2.8GHz, but Hiarcs won its match vs. Crafty.) As far as Junior, although Hiarcs left book at (+.50) it had trouble developing and decided (poorly) to sac a piece for 3 pawns which was dubious and left itself under pressure. It briefly appeared as if it could hang on at one point at -4.2 in a short 'deadlock', but eventually pushed another pawn and created an extra weakness which finally lost the game. I do see your point cxoncerning hardware disadvantages for single threaded engines in big tournaments (where quads and 8-ways are present) but I did not feel hardware to be an issue in CCT-Blitz. -elc.
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.