Тема: Шахматы: шахматы для компьютера скачать бесплатно, шахматы онлайн играть с компьютером. Новости шахмат. Статьи о шахматах. :: Sedatchess

Прислано Sedat Canbaz 03-10-2015 02:47
#501

One new test more !)

Rybka 4.1 x64 1 core, i7 980X @4.02GHz, 222 kN/s, 6 sec/move: 9/132
Rybka 4.1 x64 2 core, i7 980X @2.04GHz, 215 kN/s, 6 sec/move: 7/132

Crafty 24.1 x64 2 core, i7 980X @2.04GHz, 5142 kN/s, 6 sec/move: 4/128
Crafty 24.1 x64 1 core, i7 980X @4.02GHz, 5124 kN/s, 6 sec/move: 1/128

Some Notes:
Used unsolved positions in 3 seconds/move, 1 core on i7 980X 3.33GHz
Exception Stockfish and Houdini, Crafty surpassed the formula rules too !)
As we see, the above mentioned engines did not follow the old formula ^0.76
It looks like, Rybka is more near to this old formula, but again in case of comparing the speeds:
- We can not use the strict number ^0.76
or it does not mean if same kN/s values, the playing strength should be same !
But however, the kN/s values are more useful for majority of the chess programs !

Continuing...
For example, I can say the same thing in case of doubling the processor speeds,
It will be wrong, if we use any strict formula ...I mean some engines gain 50 Elo, some 60 Elo etc...
Also it is similar issue, in case of increasing the time controls on same hardware...
For example, as far as I remember in one of my testings:
Rybka 30m+1s started to be stronger over Stockfish 1m+1s

In other words,
As I mentioned before, it all depends on our used conditions
For example here are some main factors, which are playing a very BIG role:
Hardware speeds, engine versions, opening books, time controls, etc..

Greetings,
Sedat