Author: Melvin S. Schwartz
Date: 17:30:24 05/29/99
Go up one level in this thread
On May 29, 1999 at 18:42:22, Mark Young wrote: >On May 29, 1999 at 15:06:14, Hans Christian Lykke wrote: > >>On May 29, 1999 at 14:05:29, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: >> >>> >>>On May 29, 1999 at 11:16:22, Dave Gomboc wrote: >>> >>>>On May 29, 1999 at 10:09:02, Melvin S. Schwartz wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>>I don't understand how you can seriously give credence to this match when you >>>>>are running Nimzo on superior hardware. The advantage of Nimzo on a Pentium 200 >>>>>MMX is not to be taken lightly. Regardless, Hiarcs 6 is outdated by Hiarcs 7 and >>>>>the Hash tables in Hiarcs 7 is much higher than what you listed for Hiarcs 6. My >>>>>main point is that when testing chess programs, you should test them on the SAME >>>>>type of computer. >>>>> >>>>>Regards, >>>>>Mel >>>> >>>>No, he shouldn't. He should report the speed of the processor and the version >>>>of the software, just as he has. >>> >>>If you support this kind of testing, good luck on trying to get meaningful >>>evaluations. I think you're getting into more of a hypothetical circumstance >>>here with uneven testing. >>> > >>>>"Hiarcs 6, P90", "Hiarcs 7, P200MMX", and "Hiarcs 7, K2-450" are all different >>>>entities that can be expected to have significantly different ratings. That a >>>>newer hardware/software combination exists does not make it invalid or even >>>>useless to assess the strength of an older one. >>> >>>I believe Nimzo 99 is a newer program than Hiarcs 6. If that is the case, it >>>would futher support uneven testing. How many people would be interested in how >>>Hiarcs 6 does against..as opposed to Hiarcs 7 against...?. Furthermore, who is >>>still selling Hiarcs 6??? >>> >>>I'm not saying there is absolutely no purpose in testing outdated software, but >>>rather time and testing could be put to better use. >>> >> >>I have two P200MMX computers and one P90 >>Sometimes I use one of the P200 to other things than playing SSDF games. >>To get more SSDF games, I then play P200 against P90. >>I will continue that way, no matter what you say. > >As you know SSDF's method is sound. People have a hard time understanding how a >ratings system works. It is meaningless what hardward and how old or new the >program is when testing, what is importent for testing is that you have a firm >rating to start testing against. The programs with ratings on P90 hardware meet >this, without having a rating to weak to play programs on P200 hardware. Yes as >we know this is a mismatch playing P90 vs P200 hardware, but not in terms of how >a ratings system works or the final ratings when testing is done. I absolutely disagree. The speed of a computer does without question affect the performance one can obtain with software. To say it is not relevant that Hiarcs 6 is running on a P90 versus any other program running on 200MMX is not affecting the rating status of Hiarcs 6 is in my opinion ludicrous! If you check out Shep's site, you'll see he runs tounaments at 40/2 with chess software all running on the SAME TYPE OF COMPUTER. That is the ONLY fair way to compare A against B. Mel >> >>Venlig hilsen >> >>Hans Chr. Lykke >>http://home3.inet.tele.dk/hclykke/
This page took 0.01 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.