Author: Jeroen van Dorp
Date: 05:43:46 06/08/99
Go up one level in this thread
Well, it takes some time to offend ME, buddy :-) But Dave puts it right. What you're basically saying is that Hiarcs should get a handicap to be able to be compared with Fritz. IMO that's not right. It seems that Hiarcs uses the SAME system resources Fritz uses, but a lot better. And I think that's an important indication that the engine is stronger. If that would be not the case, then what ARE the parameters for measuring strenght. You know what I mean? It's like giving more time on the clock to Vishy Anand because he's not as strong as Kasparov. That would be rediculous. BTW on another place here on the board we discussed the use of one machine in stead of two machines for testing engines. I only use one computer - that's all I have :-), and as pointed out that affects comparable performance a lot more. Don't be faint hearted Mel, let me know if you disagree! Jeroen ;-} BTW I let the two play a couple of games with Hiarcs 8Mb HT and Fritz 32Mb HT, as you suggested. Hiarcs won 6-3 with 3 draws. But it were 30 minute games, no 40/20. I'll try that shortly. CU
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.