Author: Francis Monkman
Date: 07:49:49 05/28/99
Go up one level in this thread
On May 28, 1999 at 08:17:48, Mark Young wrote: >>I've posted my 'accurate timings' for Fritz, and they seem to make some sense in >>terms >>of the hardware used. True I'm running Hiarcs 7 on an older machine (180 MHz), >>and with limited hash, but this discrepancy seems too great! I understand that >>Melvin Schwartz also got timings faster than mine (not sure what he's running), >>but the time taken to reject g4 was also several minutes. I also get a different >>sequence of choices from yours (?). >> >>Francis > >I don't know what to tell you, my times are correct. I ran in dos 98, with 64mb >hash for the hiarcs7 program. The position was cut and pasted to my epd file. I >don't know why your times are so bad, this was an easy position for hiarcs7. I heard from Melvin that he's running a 400MHz K6 (K7 please, now!). I'm going to setup Hiarcs 7 on my newer machine, see where we get to... Thanks, anyway -- it's right of you to point this out! Next good position I find, I think I'll post it without timings -- anyone can do their own, and my main aim is to provide useful test material for programmers -- never mind which commercial program wins! On the other hand, I reserve the right to wax occasionally enthusiastic about programs like CSTal II and LGG 2.0, when they show, however sporadically, signs of intelligence... Francis
This page took 0.01 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.