Author: Joseph Ciarrochi
Date: 03:28:01 01/04/06
Go up one level in this thread
I wonder why fruit seems better that fritz9 here, wheras in the cegt list they are almost identical. Is there some critical difference in testing conditions that can explain the discrepency? Or, is this just a sampling error issue? On January 03, 2006 at 10:01:26, Thoralf Karlsson wrote: > THE SSDF RATING LIST 2006-01-03 1104075 games played by 274 computers > Rating + - Games Won Oppo > ------ --- --- ----- --- ---- > 1 Fruit 2.2.1 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2852 35 -33 457 68% 2717 > 2 Fritz 9.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2819 32 -30 587 74% 2639 > 3 Shredder 9.0 UCI 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2818 24 -23 995 70% 2667 > 4 Shredder 8.0 CB 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2805 23 -22 1115 71% 2648 > 5 Shredder 7.04 UCI 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2801 22 -21 1175 68% 2669 > 6 Junior 9.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2786 25 -24 826 64% 2682 > 7 Deep Fritz 8.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2781 24 -23 982 69% 2642 > 8 Junior 8.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2766 24 -24 888 65% 2660 > 9 Shredder 7.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2765 26 -25 841 69% 2629 > 10 Deep Fritz 7.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2764 24 -23 938 65% 2654 > 11 Fritz 8.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2752 21 -20 1218 63% 2660 > 12 Deep Junior 8.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2749 30 -29 567 63% 2658 > 13 Fritz 7.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2739 28 -27 674 61% 2660 > 14 Gandalf 6.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2736 25 -25 793 57% 2683 > 15 Hiarcs 9.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2735 21 -20 1156 60% 2666 > 16 Pro Deo 1.1 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2724 27 -26 712 64% 2622 > 17 Shredder 6.0 Pad UCI 256MB Athlon 1200 2722 22 -22 1033 62% 2638 > 18 Chess Tiger 2004 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2721 25 -24 814 58% 2666 > 19 Chess Tiger 14.0 CB 256MB Athlon 1200 2718 29 -28 597 60% 2648 > 20 Chess Tiger 15.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2717 20 -20 1175 56% 2676 > 21 Deep Fritz 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2716 30 -29 571 61% 2640 > 22 Chessmaster 9000 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2714 36 -36 376 55% 2677 > 22 Shredder 6.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2714 29 -29 587 60% 2644 > 24 Gambit Tiger 2.0 256MB Athlon 1200 2713 29 -29 583 58% 2654 > 25 Junior 7.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2699 23 -22 963 53% 2679 > 26 Rebel 12.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2681 32 -32 484 57% 2630 > 27 Hiarcs 8.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2680 21 -21 1116 51% 2672 > 28 Ruffian 1.0.1 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2674 25 -25 789 51% 2670 > 29 Rebel Century 4.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2673 29 -29 590 60% 2602 > 30 Deep Sjeng 1.5a 256MB Athlon 1200 MH 2670 31 -31 493 52% 2659 > 31 Gandalf 4.32h 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2660 28 -28 604 52% 2649 > 31 Shredder 5.32 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2660 26 -26 739 50% 2657 > 33 Gandalf 5.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2651 36 -37 364 45% 2688 > 34 Gandalf 5.1 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2636 25 -25 758 55% 2602 > 35 Ruffian 2.0.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2621 54 -55 165 48% 2636 > 36 Crafty 18.12/CB 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2616 23 -23 911 44% 2656 > 37 Gromit 3.11.9 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2608 44 -46 246 43% 2660 > 38 Yace Paderborn 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2604 35 -35 389 48% 2618 > 39 Nimzo 8.0 128MB K6-2 450 MHz 2555 19 -20 1282 44% 2597 > 40 Crafty 19.17 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2521 43 -47 264 31% 2664 > 41 SOS 128MB K6-2 450 MHz 2517 15 -15 2237 36% 2617 > 42 Goliath Light 128MB K6-2 450 MHz 2509 18 -18 1660 31% 2651 > 43 MChess Pro 8.0 128MB K6-2 450 MHz 2479 25 -26 753 40% 2550 > 44 Genius 6.5 128MB K6-2 450 MHz 2475 29 -29 565 48% 2488 > 45 Hiarcs 9.5a/9.6 Palm TungstenE OMAP 126 2391 65 -61 129 62% 2301 > 46 R30 v. 2.5 2274 41 -38 343 69% 2135 > 47 Mephisto London 68 030 36 MHz 2202 37 -37 362 51% 2197 > 48 Chess Genius 1.4 SX1 OMAP 310 120 MHz 2173 59 -56 152 58% 2114 > 49 Chess Tiger 14.9 Palm m515 16MB 42MHz 2102 69 -74 100 39% 2181 > 50 Chess Genius 1.5 Palm m515 16MB 42MHz 1871 69 -78 100 32% 2003 > > > 1 Fruit 2.2.1 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz, 2852 >Fritz 9 A1200 5-7 Shredd9 A1200 20-20 Shr7.04 A1200 26-16 >Junior9 A1200 24.5-16.5 DpFrit8 A1200 24.5-15.5 Gandal6 A1200 28.5-11.5 >Hiarcs9 A1200 27.5-16.5 CT 15.0 A1200 31-15 Junior7 A1200 1.5-0.5 >Ruffia1 A1200 10-5 GambTig K6450 31.5-8.5 Craf18. A1200 38.5-8.5 >Hiarcs 8 K6-2 7.5-0.5 Nimzo 8 K6450 36-4 > > 2 Fritz 9.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz, 2819 >Fruit22 A1200 7-5 Shredd9 A1200 21.5-21.5 Junior9 A1200 23-17 >Fritz 8 A1200 9-3 Hiarcs9 A1200 29.5-14.5 Shredd7 K6450 30.5-15.5 >CT15.0 K6450 31-13 DpFritz7 K6-2 33.5-10.5 Shre532 K6450 20.5-3.5 >Junior6 K6450 42-11 Shred5 K6-450 35.5-3.5 Nimz732 K6450 28.5-11.5 >Nimzo 8 K6450 32-8 Hiar732 K6450 33-7 Goliath K6450 13.5-1.5 >Fritz532 P200 3-1 Craf18.12 K62 40-7 > > 45 Hiarcs 9.5a/9.6 Palm TungstenE OMAP 126, 2391 >SOS K6-2 450 6.5-13.5 Goliath K6450 6.5-13.5 Genius 3 P90 10-10 >Rebel 7.0 P90 6-3 Fritz 3.0 P90 16-4 London 68 030 16-4 >Star Sapphire 19.5-0.5 > > >For nearly two years Stefan Meyer-Kahlen has been leading the SSDF >Rating List with different versions of his program Shredder. But on >this first list of 2006, Shredder 9.0 UCI has dropped to the third >place. > >One point ahead, on place two, comes Fritz 9.0 A1200 MHz with 2819 after >587 tournament games. During several earlier years Frans Morschs program >dominated in the top of the SSDF list. Fritz 9.0 didn't reach the first >place today, but it's rating is 38 points ahead of it's predecessor. > >On the first place comes a program which never before has competed on >the SSDF Rating List! It's Fruit 2.2.1 A1200 MHz written by Fabien Letouzey >from France! After 457 games Fruit 2.2.1 has 2852, 33 points ahead of >Fritz 9.0! In August last year an earlier version of Fruit came on the >second place of the WCCC in Reykjavik. > >It's fascinating that it's still possible to improve the playing strength of >chess programs, measured on the same hardware! I'm looking forward to see >what other programmers, newcomers and veterans, can achieve during 2006. > >Lately we have tested some chess programs from Richard Lang and Christophe >Théron running on handheld computers or mobile phones. Now Mark Uniacke has >entered this trade with Hiarcs 9.5a/9.6 on a Palm Tungsten E using a OMAP- >processor on 126 MHz. This combination of chess program and hardware has >achieved a rating of 2391 based on 129 games! That is so far the highest >rating among non-PC entrants! > >During the latest years SSDF hasn't published as many rating lists as we did >before. How it will be in the future is hard to know, but at least I can say >that our present testing capacity is as good as before, with seven testers >using ten pairs of PCs for evaluating the playing strength of chess programs. > >During the nearest months we hope to find out how strong Hiarcs 10 and Rybka 1.2 >are. > >Thoralf Karlsson
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.