Author: Albert Silver
Date: 05:41:34 01/10/00
Go up one level in this thread
On January 10, 2000 at 01:40:22, Chessfun wrote:
>On January 10, 2000 at 00:25:17, Albert Silver wrote:
>
>>On January 08, 2000 at 13:20:12, Chessfun wrote:
>>
>>>On January 08, 2000 at 12:17:51, Christophe Theron wrote:
>>>
>>><snipped>
>>>
>>>>I see that this position raises very little interest, or maybe top programs are
>>>>not able to solve it? Actually I know that Genius5 solves it pretty fast (maybe
>>>>faster than Tiger, I'm not sure).
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Christophe
>>>
>>>To answer the first post. I don't have a favorite program you won't
>>>send it to me !!.
>>>
>>>Genius 5. Takes 3 mins 25 secs on Cel 433 to post a + score for 1. f6.
>>
>>Genius 3 takes 3:38 on a K6-2/350.
>>
>> A.S.
>
>
>
>For interest I tried Genius 3 also !!.
>Cel 433
>Genius 3 takes 3:39 depth 14-26.
>Thanks.
I didn't expect it to be a second slower. How much hash was used? I'll try it
with a small setting to see the difference.
Albert Silver
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>>Genius 6. Takes 4 mins 12 secs to post a + score for 1. f6.
>>>It looks at 1. f6. for first 44 secs showing - then switches to Kxg2
>>>before going back to 1. f6.
>>>
>>>CM6K default no solve after 12 min 19 secs 42,000,000 nodes.
>>>
>>>Hiarcs 7.32 Looks at 1. f6. for first up to first 2 mins showing -
>>>then switches to Kxg2 before I gave up at depth 15/30 approx 7 mins
>>>still showing Kxg2.
>>>
>>>Fritz 6 No luck after 5 mins 1. Kxg2.
>>>
>>>I had tried this on other softwares, Tiger is the fastest I have heard.
>>>
>>>
>>>Thanks.
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.