our actual rating lists are online and can be found under the attached links.
40 / 20:
New games: 1099 ; 27 different engines
Total: 583.226
NEW Engines 55 Stockfish 2.2.2 w32 1CPU: 2934 - 350 games (startrating is close to version 2.01) 816 DoubleCheck 3.1 x64: 2365 - 443 games (new here and about 10 points behind the blitz-result with version 3.0)
UPDATES
...not much differences:
386 Texel 1.01 x64: 2650 - 1174 games (+1) 646 RedQueen 1.1.1 x64 1CPU: 2472 - 656 games (some more games played with not so good results - name will be corrected later)
40 / 4: New games: 5456 All games now: 1.001.760!!! - a jublilee!!!
New Engines 351 Texel 1.01 x64 1CPU: 2638 - 1000 games (much better than CuckooChess here too of course) 425 Texel 1.01 w32 1CPU: 2599 - 1300 games (39 points under 64bit-version) 883 Cheese 1.4 x64: 2317 - 1000 games (+90 to version 1.3b) 793 DoubleCheck 3.0 x64: 2377 - 1000 games (+160 to version 2.4)
Updates 51 Stockfish 2.2.2 w32 1CPU: 2923 - 1500 games (-3) 833 Zarkov 5 (MCS): 2352 - 1000 games (+5) 1048 LittleThought 1.04 w32: 2163 - 1000 games (-1)
40/120
See here our new single-list (with 7800 games): http://www.husvankempen.de/nunn//40120n ... liste.html
New is Zappa Mexico II x64 with 2721/150 games.
Stockfish 2.2.2 x64 lost 8 points and Deep Junior 13 x64 lost 16:
Naum 4.2 x64: +4
40/20 pb=on
Our new list raises fast. We now have made 4000 games.
New is Chiron 1.1a x64 with 2822/520 games.
One question regarding your two 40/20 lists (regular and pb on): I would like to know whether the komodo ratings would differ much if you separated games played with sse4 from those played without. We appear to be about 30 elo away from Houdini (talking 1 core) on both lists (averaging Houdini 1.5 and 2.0 since 1.5 is higher), but perhaps the gap is narrower if only sse4 games are considered. Since I estimate we have gained 25 elo since K4, I'm wondering if we might have finally caught or passed Houdini on sse4 machines.
lkaufman wrote:One question regarding your two 40/20 lists (regular and pb on): I would like to know whether the komodo ratings would differ much if you separated games played with sse4 from those played without. We appear to be about 30 elo away from Houdini (talking 1 core) on both lists (averaging Houdini 1.5 and 2.0 since 1.5 is higher), but perhaps the gap is narrower if only sse4 games are considered. Since I estimate we have gained 25 elo since K4, I'm wondering if we might have finally caught or passed Houdini on sse4 machines.
Larry, you really should stop worrying about catching Houdini 1.5 or 2.
In case you don't follow the Houdini Facebook page, our current Houdini development version is about 60 Elo stronger than Houdini 1.5 - with an increasing trend at longer longer time controls.
lkaufman wrote:One question regarding your two 40/20 lists (regular and pb on): I would like to know whether the komodo ratings would differ much if you separated games played with sse4 from those played without. We appear to be about 30 elo away from Houdini (talking 1 core) on both lists (averaging Houdini 1.5 and 2.0 since 1.5 is higher), but perhaps the gap is narrower if only sse4 games are considered. Since I estimate we have gained 25 elo since K4, I'm wondering if we might have finally caught or passed Houdini on sse4 machines.
Larry, you really should stop worrying about catching Houdini 1.5 or 2.
In case you don't follow the Houdini Facebook page, our current Houdini development version is about 60 Elo stronger than Houdini 1.5 - with an increasing trend at longer longer time controls.
Well, you were clearly wrong in claiming that H2 was stronger than H1.5 (except in blitz or using multi-cores), so maybe you will again be proven wrong. Your claim of +60 over H1.5 and +40 over H2 is already suspicious, unless you are talking about blitz, since (40 + 0 = 60) is false.
In any case, I think it is desirable for any commercial program to be stronger than any free one, so passing h1.5 (and thereby also h2 in case you make that free eventually) is important for all commercial programs regardless of whether a later commercial engine is stronger than others.
lkaufman wrote:Well, you were clearly wrong in claiming that H2 was stronger than H1.5 (except in blitz or using multi-cores), so maybe you will again be proven wrong. Your claim of +60 over H1.5 and +40 over H2 is already suspicious, unless you are talking about blitz, since (40 + 0 = 60) is false.
It will be my pleasure to ease your suspicious mind at the time of the Houdini 3 release.
lkaufman wrote:Well, you were clearly wrong in claiming that H2 was stronger than H1.5 (except in blitz or using multi-cores), so maybe you will again be proven wrong. Your claim of +60 over H1.5 and +40 over H2 is already suspicious, unless you are talking about blitz, since (40 + 0 = 60) is false.
In any case, I think it is desirable for any commercial program to be stronger than any free one, so passing h1.5 (and thereby also h2 in case you make that free eventually) is important for all commercial programs regardless of whether a later commercial engine is stronger than others.
Well, SedatChess, Frank Quisinksky gave +20 and Vincent Lejeune list give +9
And btw Komodo 4 above 3 on Vincent Lejeune list = + 11 where you claimed to have +25 before release
lkaufman wrote:Well, you were clearly wrong in claiming that H2 was stronger than H1.5 (except in blitz or using multi-cores), so maybe you will again be proven wrong. Your claim of +60 over H1.5 and +40 over H2 is already suspicious, unless you are talking about blitz, since (40 + 0 = 60) is false.
In any case, I think it is desirable for any commercial program to be stronger than any free one, so passing h1.5 (and thereby also h2 in case you make that free eventually) is important for all commercial programs regardless of whether a later commercial engine is stronger than others.
Well, SedatChess, Frank Quisinksky gave +20 and Vincent Lejeune list give +9
And btw Komodo 4 above 3 on Vincent Lejeune list = + 11 where you claimed to have +25 before release
http://sedat-chess.110mb.com/index.php?p=1_8
+20
Rank Name Elo + - games score oppo. draws
01 Houdini 2.0 Pro x64 4c 3358 25 24 430 63% 3272 47%
02 Houdini 1.5a x64 4c 3338 17 17 863 62% 3264 49%
http://www.amateurschach.de/main/_swcr-all.txt
+20
NAME / version of engine ELO + - GAM SC OP DR
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1 1 Houdini 2.0c x64 3019 18 18 1400 79% 2777 28%
- 2 Houdini 1.5 x64 2999 14 14 2320 78% 2772 29%
http://home.scarlet.be/vincentlejeune/rating20120402.txt
+9
2 Houdini 2.0 64-bit 4CPU 3303 12 12 2833 76% 3102 32%
3 Houdini 1.5 64-bit 4CPU 3294 10 10 3386 72% 3140 37%
I acknowledge that Houdini 2 had improved MP scaling over 1.5. I'm talking about the single core performance. The combined results other than blitz show Houdini 2 to be below 1.5 (marginally).
.......... 
.......... 
