Author: stuart taylor
Date: 16:37:16 01/02/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 02, 2000 at 11:48:28, Mark Young wrote:
>On January 02, 2000 at 06:40:16, stuart taylor wrote:
>
>>On January 02, 2000 at 05:34:49, Mark Young wrote:
>>
>>>On January 02, 2000 at 03:23:34, Oles Girniak wrote:
>>>
>>>>May be someone already run them in the few test positions. And can tell
>>>>something about diff between them.
>>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>>Fritz 6 looks to be stronger. This may be due to Fritz 6 having a bit more
>>>understanding of some endgame positions, and the use of the tablebase in its
>>>search. This is only an off the cuff judgement from watching some of the games.
>>>I should know more shortly now that the Y2K computer scare is over, and my boss
>>>stops working me 80+ hours a week updating his computer systems.
>>>
>>>Right now I have Fritz 6 playing a match with Hiarcs 7.32 at 40/2. Fritz 6 is
>>>winning the match after 6 games by +1 -0 =5.
>>>
>>>(My current rating list for all games played from G/5 to 40/2hrs.)
>>>
>>>* all programs play using their own book.
>>>
>>>* all programs without their own native book play using their own exclusive copy
>>>of Junior 5's book.
>>>
>>>1 Fritz 6 2512 181
>>>2 Fritz 5.32 2499 119
>>>3 Junior 5.0 2487 156
>>>4 Hiarcs 7.32 2476 139
>>>5 Crafty 16.18 2475 114
>>>6 Fritz 5.00/16Bit 2465 78
>>>7 Crafty 16.15 2461 54
>>>8 Crafty 16.13 2440 63
>>>9 Crafty 16.6 2438 76
>>>10 Hiarcs 4.0 2430 61
>>>11 Crafty 17.04 2424 65
>>>12 Hiarcs 6.0 2382 74
>>>13 Crafty 15.18 2373 55
>>>14 Comet B10 2349 61
>>>15 Comet B11 2337 42
>>>16 Comet B02 2315 56
>>>17 Doctor? 3.0 2232 56
>>>18 EXchess 2.51 2064 66
>>
>>
>>How can hiarcs 6 possibly come so low down on your list? Even alot less
>>than hiarcs 4?
>
>Hiarcs 6 is not a very good program at fast time controls. Most of the games at
>this time used to calculate the ratings were played at a fast time control. This
>will change as more long time control games are played.
>
>>And is k6-3 clearly better than k6-2?
>I heard it was a bit faster. In terms of rating for a chess program I don't
>think it would matter much MHz for MHz.
>
>>And is Rebel realy that bad with amd? What's wrong?
>
>Rebel runs fine on the AMD chip. The only problems I have seen with Rebel
>running on the AMD chip is when users overclocked the chip to much and/ or
>messed with the memory timings in bios trying to get that last 1% in speed out
>of the chip... which gives them nothing in term of a stronger program.
>
>
>>And is there any point in upgrading to Athlon? Or other? (I have k6-3 400mhz
>
>Yes, when you can double the speed of the computer it is well worth upgrading.
>In terms of running chess programs....no if you just play them yourself for fun,
>I don't think you could tell the difference in playing a program on a K6-3
>400mhz or the latest K7.
>
>> and I'm waiting to see which is strongest program, or which two.
>> Might it not be Rebel Centuary)?
>
>It could be Rebel Centuary.... but from what I have seen it will not be.
>
>From what I have seen Chesstiger should be the strongest program when it hits
>the market, but Fritz 6 and Chessmaster or Junior 6 may catch up with it.
>
>Right now the best program I have seen is Fritz 6. This program is a must have.
> I greatly appreciate your patience in answering me so lucidly.
Maybe I can ask you or anyone just two more points?
When I was asking about Athlon, I meaned to ask if it is really
true that athlon 600-mhz. is not faster than k6-3 600-mhz? or even
considerably slower-for chess? for other things?
And finally, what about hiarcs? I was sure that Mr. Uniake would have
some good ideas for his next program. But has anyone heard anything about
any such thing?
>Many
>> Thanks!
>> Stuart Taylor
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.