Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Hiarcs 10 Test (40'/40) After 250 Games / Match vs Fruit 2.2.1

Author: George Tsavdaris

Date: 06:34:53 01/07/06

Go up one level in this thread


On January 07, 2006 at 08:04:15, Uri Blass wrote:

>On January 07, 2006 at 07:14:43, Thorsten Czub wrote:
>
>>rybka has problems on CPU's such as Celeron with low mhz and blitz games.
>>here it is not doing enough NPS or search depth and the opponent profits.
>>giving the same engines more time or faster machine or cpu with bigger cache
>>rybka can again show its strength.
>>
>>rybka is the best example that it is NOT unimportant which machine or level or
>>book you use. i get e.g. very good results when using the junior book for rybka.
>>
>>rybka has also problems with togaII 1.1a.
>>
>>overall i would also say that rybka is in the moment the leading program.
>>
>>but concerning the order of s9, f9, fruit2.2.1 and others i am not conform with
>>some data that is presented.
>>
>>
>>from what i have hiarcs10 has no problems with f9 or s9 or fruit.
>>only with rybka.
>>and this can be fixed. it is no class difference but only a change of a few
>>switches and suddenly even rybka is in the same group.
>
>When you change parameters in Hiarcs and do not change parameters in rybka
>comparison is not fair.
>

Correct....! The fact that there is a set of parameters different from default
of Hiarcs10, that can beat Rybka, should not be used to show the Hiarcs 10
strength at general..... Perhaps Shredder 7.0 has a set of parameters that can
beat Hiarcs10, another set that can beat Fritz9, etc, but overall it is much
weaker than the todays top engines.....


>It seems that rybka slightly positional personality search direction is the best
>based on all tests that I read.
>
>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.