Author: blass uri
Date: 16:59:09 06/21/99
Go up one level in this thread
On June 21, 1999 at 11:16:01, Tomas Casanovas Martinez wrote: >Having adapted the hash tables to the recommended level of each program, I have >continued and finished the intensive Hiarcs 7.32 test.(40 moves/2 hours). > >Hiarcs 7.32- Fritz 5.32 +5 -0 =3 6,5-1,5 > >Hiarcs 7.32- Junior 5 +8 -3 =4 10,0-5,0 > >Hiarcs 7.32- Crafty 16.6 +15 -3 =2 16,5-3,5 > >This very high performance of Hiarcs 7.32, together with other tests run by >other people here, makes me think that probably Hiarcs 7.32 will be closer to >2.650 than to 2.625, making very strange its poor performance in Padeborn. I do not agree that it had a poor performance in Padeborn. It was playing against better programs than Fritz5.32,Junior5,crafty16.6. I think that most of the opponent of Hiarcs were clearly better than Fritz5.32,Junior5 and Crafty16.6 It drew against Deep Junior(better than Junior5 in software and in hardware) It drew against shredder4(a program that may have 2700 ssdf rating) It lost against parralel Fritz(better than Fritz5.32) It won parralel Ferret(better than the programs that you tested Hiarcs against them). It lost against cilkchess that had a big hardware advantage. It won chesstiger and Mchess8. 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.