The point of been faster for rybka means not kns number, but the ability to faster find correct lines and best deep plys, while 3000 kns Fritz and 5000 kns Junior just do the same job by diving into 'every ply one by one' without too much evaluation of positions. Jul 22, 2015 Hard program vs program duel. I played with Deep Fritz 14 (black I guess), my computer, Intel Core i5-750 2.66Ghz / 8Mb SmartCache (4 real cores), 10Gb RAM DDR3 1333Mhz on double channel.
Your ignorance is strong if you think 50 ELO (especially when they're in the 3000's) is going to make any difference on analysis. Houdini's strong point is two fold, one that it's free, and two that it can keep up with Rybka. Even if it were slightly weaker than Rybka it would still be favorable because it is free. It just so happens that it's slightly stronger. Houdini being 'stronger' doesn't mean that Rybka is going to miss opening ideas that you seem to think using Houdini for will make the difference. Chess has two different communities, one is the engine community who like to play ELO wars, and the other is the normal chess playing community.
Any modern engine, Fritz, Shredder, Junior, Houdini, Stockfish, Rybka, Fire, Hiarcs, Critter, Crafty etc will serve well those who decide to use them. They are all your friends. Deep Fritz 13 now has Houdini 3 Pro version pre installed.Those who hate computer analysis, or dont think Houdini 3 is any better at analysing ECO main lines than lower rated engines are entitled to their opinion, and can definitely not purchase Deep Fritz 13.On the other hand, if anyone is interested in finding the absolute best continuation for white against the Kings Indian, or the Zaitsev var. Of the Ruy Lopez, or the fact that the Albin Counter Gambit is completely sound, the opportunity is now available.
Don't worry, 80 kns means 1 million position for every 12 seconds, does it not enough for deep analyzes? 5 millions per only one minute already. The point of been faster for rybka means not kns number, but the ability to faster find correct lines and best deep plys, while 3000 kns Fritz and 5000 kns Junior just do the same job by diving into 'every ply one by one' without too much evaluation of positions. The 'high kns' approach faster and deaper in the endgames and in later middlegames with open queens, but in complex and early middlegames and in openings 5000 kns just useless speed, because this extra kns means only 2-4 additional plys, (12 Rybka plys vs 15 Fritz plys over one minute, for example), so Rybka will find better plys much faster. And there is the last problem - Rybka and Fritz both has blind spot for tactics with deep sacrifices, even after many hours of analyses, such engines with special tunes like Hiarcs (don't remember others) are slower than Fritz but has ability to break through those blind spots in positions with long attack and mate threats in middlegames, in positions with danger of passed pawn promotion and many other like this, where both Fritz (and all speedy engines like Junior too) and Rybka fails totally. Also there is an attempt to make fast engine and to make it with tunes for breaking throught the blind spots, but those attempts are not very successful yet (Shredder and stockfish for example), so those are just other engines and nothing more.
That's very interesting. I know professional players know which engine is best suited for different kinds of positions, but you seem to know a lot about it. Have you worked a lot with engines yourself or someone you know? I used a lot of testing positions of all differend kind and game stages, for example this one: Even hiarcs can't break through in first seconds, it needs some time (or you can just show him first move manually, then he will instantly find the rest ), while other engines are totally blind even after 3 move, just blank calculators, so kns number doesn't mean real speed. Because in simple positions hiarcs just too slow in 'overcheching everything' mode.
Also example: In this position no one engine can spot the only winning move (and lines later) for black. In many games you played (especially in open sicilian, KID-like, KG) could be a lot of such moves hiding, but you may never find that out even after the game.
Rybka and Stockfish find the winning line pretty fast, in a couple of seconds. I also showed it to a couple of other engines and they indeed have problems assessing the position correctly. Only after a long series of forced lines can they acknowledge Black's advantage. What was the winning line for black? I must admit, after quite a few minutes the only thing Fritz 12 gives me is Rd4 but with a huge winning advantage of: 1rq4k/5p2/p2R1PpP/2n1p3/4r2P/1PN2Q2/2P5/2K4R b -0 1 Analysis by Fritz 12: 1.
=/+ ( -0.36): 1.Td4 2.Td1 e4 3.De3 Pd3+ 4.Txd3 Txd3 5.Txd3 exd3 6.Dxd3 Dg4 7.Dd5 Tf8 8.Dd6 Te8 9.Kb2 Dxh4 10.Dd7 Tf8 11.Dc6 Dxh6 12.Dxa6 Te8 13.Da7 Kg8 14.Pd5 Dd2 2. = (0.00): 1.Pxb3+ 2.cxb3 Td4 3.Td1 Dc5 4.T6xd4 exd4 5.Kc2 dxc3 6.Td3 Da3 7.Txc3 Da2+ 8.Kc1 Td8 9.De3 Da1+ 10.Kc2 Da2+ 11.Kc1 3. = (0.00): 1.Tf4 2.De3 Dc7 3.Td5 Tc8 4.Dxe5 Dxe5 5.Txe5 Pxb3+ 6.Kb2 Pd2 7.Kc1 (Dekker, Limmen ). Hm, I did let it run, and after 2 hrs more, you´re right, the second given Nxb3+ is now first and winning Analysis by Fritz 12: 1.+ ( -2.33): 1.Pxb3+ 2.cxb3 Txb3 3.Kc2 Teb4 4.h5 e4 5.Dg3 Tb2+ 6.Kd1 T4b3 7.hxg6 Tb1+ 8.Pxb1 Txg3 9.gxf7 Df8 10.Td7 2. =/+ (-0.32): 1.Td4 2.Td1 e4 3.De3 Pd3+ 4.Txd3 Txd3 5.Txd3 exd3 6.Dxd3 Dg4 7.Dd6 Tc8 8.Kb2 Dxh4 9.Dxa6 Te8 10.Dd6 Dxh6 11.b4 De3 3. = (0.00): 1.Tf4 2.De3 Dc7 3.Thd1 Pxb3+ 4.cxb3 Txb3 5.T6d3 Tc4 6.Kc2 Db7 7.Dxe5 Tb2+ 8.Kc1 Tb1+ 9.Kd2 Tb2+ 10.Kc1 (Dekker, Limmen ). I used a lot of testing positions of all differend kind and game stages, for example this one: Even hiarcs can't break through in first seconds, it needs some time (or you can just show him first move manually, then he will instantly find the rest ), while other engines are totally blind even after 3 move, just blank calculators, so kns number doesn't mean real speed.
Because in simple positions hiarcs just too slow in 'overcheching everything' mode. Also example: In this position no one engine can spot the only winning move (and lines later) for black. In many games you played (especially in open sicilian, KID-like, KG) could be a lot of such moves hiding, but you may never find that out even after the game. Hm, I did let it run, and after 2 hrs more, you´re right, the second given Nxb3+ is now first and winning Analysis by Fritz 12: 1.+ (-2.33): 1.Pxb3+ 2.cxb3 Txb3 3.Kc2 Teb4 4.h5 e4 5.Dg3 Tb2+ 6.Kd1 T4b3 7.hxg6 Tb1+ 8.Pxb1 Txg3 9.gxf7 Df8 10.Td7 2. =/+ (-0.32): 1.Td4 2.Td1 e4 3.De3 Pd3+ 4.Txd3 Txd3 5.Txd3 exd3 6.Dxd3 Dg4 7.Dd6 Tc8 8.Kb2 Dxh4 9.Dxa6 Te8 10.Dd6 Dxh6 11.b4 De3 3.
= (0.00): 1.Tf4 2.De3 Dc7 3.Thd1 Pxb3+ 4.cxb3 Txb3 5.T6d3 Tc4 6.Kc2 Db7 7.Dxe5 Tb2+ 8.Kc1 Tb1+ 9.Kd2 Tb2+ 10.Kc1 (Dekker, Limmen ) Your engine missed 5.Qxc3 with mate in 4. I saw Nxb3+ as a strong, forcing move for Black after a few seconds without a computer engine. It removes part of White's pawn cover (removal of the guard) and decreases White's king saftey. Regarding Stockfish 1.7.
I have enjoyed Stockfish 1.5, but 1.7 locks my computer up. I'm using it with the Fritz 12 GUI. GEt the 1.8 version of Stockfish. And FWIW the computer doesn't 'know' that there is a winning move, whereas the human does. A computer programmed to find the winning move would investigate the winning move much earlier, whereas in fact it discards it fairly early on in the analysis. If you didn't kow there was a winning move wht is the chance that you would have found it?
I don't know either - you could try the Rybka forums, those people are chess engine techies Here is a from the official Rybka forums discussing the type of hardware needed to maximize Rybka. Be ready to read through lines of low-level hardware specs, minute Rybka engine configurations and expensive recommendations. Did you know that Deep Rybka 4 can use 2048 cores?
(Topalov used a unique Rybka version for a 'cluster farm' and is not available to the public.) Soup up your hardware with their recommendation then make a comparison test with engines such as Stockfish, Fritz, Hiarcs, Shredder or Junior. You cannot compare Rybka's kN/s to another engine's kN/s. It's really sort of like comparing apples to oranges. You CAN, however, compare a specific version of one engine to the SAME version of the SAME engine on another machine.
Each engine has different search algorithms and look for the best move in different ways. Compare it to searching for a lost child. Let's let one group of people wearing blue shirts, say 100,000 of them, look for that lost child in every city in the USA at the same time. Now, let's let another group of people wearing red shirts, say 10,000 of them, look at the same time, but in the city where the child was lost and in the city where his grandparents live.
Which group is going to find the child first? We don't know.
One engine may spend time looking like mad at every possible move, even the lame ones; and another might instead look hard at only what it feels are the good moves. Which chess engine will find the best move first? We don't know. As I understand it, Rybka might only have xxx kN/s on a basic system, but it's looking at what it feels are only good moves. I'm not touting Rybka, I'm just telling you how I understand it to be.
See this article: From what I understand, Rybka has patented its search alogrithms. It doesn't need to look everywhere for the little boy, just in the cities w/ the best odds.
Comments are closed.
|
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |