Author: Christopher R. Dorr
Date: 13:15:04 03/30/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 30, 1999 at 08:22:12, James T. Walker wrote: >On March 29, 1999 at 13:33:20, Christopher R. Dorr wrote: > >>I think it is important to look at several things here: >> >>1. I am not convinced that the best programs really *are* thet much better than >>Crafty. In computer-computer tests, the others may well fare better, but in >>playing humans, I think it may be a different story. I for one (A weak USCF >>Master) honestly feel that Crafty is about as strong as Fritz5. I can't tell the >>difference, perhaps because they are both so much better than me. And if they >>are that much better than me, imaging how much stronger they *both* are to the >>average player (c. USCF 1400-1500). To a 1500, there is *no* strength difference >>between a 2500 and a 2550. >> >>2. Even on a single processor machine, Crafty is better than just about all the >>other programs (and humans too) at speed, on ICC. Mofongo (A single processor >>Crafty 16.6 running on normal, albeit somewhat high-end equipment) is currently >>rated 3072 at blitz. This is higher than CM6000, Fritz 5.32, Ferret, etc. At >>least at blitz, Crafty can make a very good claim for being as strong or >>stronger than everything else in the world. >> >>3. Crafty is designed to be SMP. To say it's not fair to state that Crafty on a >>Quad Xeon is better than Fritz on a single PIII is the same as saying that it's >>not fair that Deep Blue runs on a specially designed computer. If the question >>is what's the best, a very valid way of looking at is to measure their >>performance on their optimal machine. Crafty's optimal machine is a Quad Xeon or >>PIII, while Fritz's is a single PIII 500.On these optimal machines, I honestly >>doubt Fritz's superiority. >> >>In short, I believe the premise of this thread is somewhat flawed. Crafty has >>not (against humans) been demonstrated to be significantly weaker than anything >>else, especially at speed. If this question is rephrased as "Why is Crafty >>weaker than Fritz (or Rebel or whatever) at 40/2 on a single processor system >>agains humans?" or "Why doesn't Crafty fare as well against computers as it's >>anti-human blitz rating would suggest", I believe that we can answer these >>questions. As the question is currently phrased, I don't think we can answer >>this well. >> >>Chris Dorr > >Hello Chris, >How can you be sure that Fritz is only a single processor program? Crafty is >BOTH a single and a multiple. I can only compare the single to the single. My >results are below. But if you look at the Chessbase/Germany site you see that >Fritz has played on a Siemans Nixdorf Primergy 460 which is a dual PII 333 mhz >machine with 256M per processor. They claim it filled 200-300 Meg of hash >tables during each move. So somewhere there exist a multiprocessor Fritz. It >may not be commercial yet but don't bet on it staying that way. > Man, this would be something to behold! Fritz running on a new Quad PIII with a Gig of RAM? It would be interesting...I look forward to it. I think that this is probably the wave of the future, because once processors start hitting 1 GHz, I see speed improvements coming more from aggregation (SMP and Beowulf-style clustering) than from faster chip speeds. >My latest Blitz results: (Game/10) > > Program Fritz rating No. games played Gauged +129 >1. Fritz 5.32 2471 183 2600 >2. Junior 5.0 2420 223 2549 >3. Nimzo 99 2354 261 2483 >4. Crafty 16.6 2324 274 2453 >5. Crafty 16.5 2291 277 2420 >6. Comet B00 2238 344 2367 > >In the last 62 games Crafty 16.6 lost to Junior 34 to 28. This dropped Junior >down and raised Crafty 16.6 up 33 points above the Crafty 16.5. I don't know if >Crafty 16.6 is tuned better against Junior or it's just a fluke but more games >will follow. > >Jim Walker Interesting results. I look forward to seeing what more etsting brings too! Chris
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.