Author: Christophe Theron
Date: 01:07:52 01/04/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 04, 2000 at 03:28:13, Michael Cummings wrote:
>On January 03, 2000 at 21:32:12, Christophe Theron wrote:
>
>>On January 03, 2000 at 20:39:05, Michael Cummings wrote:
>>
>>>On January 03, 2000 at 10:22:31, Harald Faber wrote:
>>>
>>>>On January 03, 2000 at 07:48:16, Michael Cummings wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On January 03, 2000 at 04:48:21, Harald Faber wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On January 03, 2000 at 04:19:36, Enrique Irazoqui wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On January 03, 2000 at 03:41:36, Michael Cummings wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On January 03, 2000 at 03:15:29, Ed Schröder wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Bottom line: This Christophe is quite a guy. Coming from nowhere his
>>>>>>>>>program enters the list on no.1. When was the last time you did see
>>>>>>>>>such an event to happen?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Do you not remember CM6K. Chess Tiger already proved strong in other games
>>>>>>>>played for a while now before it made its debute on the SSDF
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>I think CM6K made the biggest surprise when it topped the SSDF, and if you look
>>>>>>>>at the 200MMX machines still remains No1.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>CM6K is the true KING
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>In the SSDF list CM6K is 1 point ahead of F532 on P200MMX. Tiger is 25 points
>>>>>>>ahead of F532 on AMD-450s.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>CM6K is very strong, but Tiger tops the list no matter how you look at it.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Enrique
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Mike does not deny it. He just points out that within the 200MMX pool CM6k is
>>>>>>the strongest and it might be that if tested on 450MHz it could be no.1 again.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>And +1 or +25 means really NOTHING with the margin of error.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>For me at least within a range of 50 pts the progs are equal strong.
>>>>>
>>>>>Enrique should know better than to compare program strength like that when
>>>>>played on faster hardware.
>>>>>
>>>>>I have heard many times that programs play better with certain processors. So in
>>>>>that case we can already say that CM6K will be better than Fritz on the 450
>>>>>machines since it is ahead of the rest on the 200MMX machines.
>>>>>
>>>>>How do we know that CM6K playing in a 450 machine will not play like a super GM
>>>>>and kill all other programs. We have already seen from games posted on here that
>>>>>CM6K has beaten Tiger is a series of games on hardware faster than the SSDF
>>>>>200MMX machines.
>>>>>
>>>>>But the fact remains and that is all I am stating, that CM6K is No1 on the
>>>>>200MMX machines.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>We can repeat it again and again, maybe Enrique understands it someday. ;-)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>One note, has anyone bothered to test tiger on the 200MMX machines to see if the
>>>>>program is way ahead of the field, or just performs better on 450 machines.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>It was tested on P90 and was ahead of CM5000, but it was the time they changed
>>>>to 450MHz so no need to take 200MHz for Tiger.
>>>
>>>The reason why it would be good to see the results on the 200 machines, would be
>>>that Chris and many others think that this program on any machine would is way
>>>ahead of the rest.
>>>
>>>So if it was way ahead on the 200MMX then the result on the 450 machine would be
>>>back up better.
>>
>>
>>I would like to see 200 long time controls games played between Tiger and CM6000
>>on P200MMX and I wonder why you don't volunteer to play them yourself.
>>
>>Then I suppose you might claim that CM6000 is the best program on 300MHz
>>computers (which have not been tested by the SSDF, and will never be), and you
>>would probably be able to claim this until the end of the times as nobody will
>>take the pain to play all these games manually.
>>
>>
>>Now that the "current" hardware on SSDF is K6-2 450MHz, I suspect they have a
>>lot of P200MMX computers available, so I would be very glad if they tested the
>>Rebel-Tiger on this platform. Tiger and CM6000 would not meet directly (as
>>CM6000 has to be operated manually and they are not willing to do it again), but
>>we would see if CM6000 can keep its ranking in the P200MMX list.
>>
>>
>>
>> Christophe
>
>I only now have a PII 450 and a PIII 500 computer. Apart from no time and no
>tiger program. I am quite sure CM6K would be number 1. Even though this is pure
>speculation, my predictions have always been pretty accurate :-)
>
>CM6K was never tested on a P90, and I think it would have been stronger by 50
>points over tiger on that hardware.
>
>How can I make these statements, as you said, unless someone tests this, we will
>never know, so thus my predictions :-)
You are making these statements without any basis, especially the one about P90.
That would mean that CM6000 is about 150 points stronger than CM5000, and it is
definitely NOT.
I see you appreciate CM6000 a lot. I would not disagree that it is a good
program (I think that nobody here disagrees BTW), but with this kind of
statement you are doing nothing good for your favorite program.
If only you were more reasonnable in your statements I think your words would
have more credit. Until that, I fear that you are unfortunately working against
the image of CM6000.
Christophe
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.