The Play Magnus is mostly a gimmick, but strong enough that Magnus could lose to his 14 yo "self."lkaufman wrote: ↑Thu Apr 11, 2019 3:23 amPawny is rated close to what I estimate Fritz 2 would be on CCRL reference hardware, not on an ancient Pentium. As for opening book I was assuming the modern engine would also use one, which would presumably be much better than any book from 1994.Raphexon wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:11 pmPawny maybe scales really badly with extra nodes/time.lkaufman wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 3:42 pmThanks. So if we use 10x as a compromise estimate, that means that my laptop is about 500 times faster than the hardware that Fritz 2 used to place ahead of everyone but Kasparov in Blitz? But this is crazy, that would imply that Fritz 2 or a similar rated engine like Pawny 0.2 x64 on my laptop would easily win 100% of the blitz games from Magnus Carlsen. Does anyone believe that? What is wrong here?Raphexon wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 6:03 amSomebody benched Stockfish 6 on old hardware. (Newer versions don't work anymore)lkaufman wrote: ↑Wed Apr 10, 2019 4:41 amI picked Pawny 0.2 x64 as my current decade substitute for Fritz 2. It is 2385 CCRL blitz; the list doesn't go back as far as Fritz 2, but by looking at the other Fritz versions and extrapolating backwards I would guess that this would be a pretty fair match on a modern computer. So presumably that would mean that even running at 0.1 GHz (instead of my nearly 5 GHz) it would be about the level of the Pentium that performed around 2750 in blitz with Fritz 2, without even considering that an i7 should be much better than a Pentium at the same speed (can anyone estimate that?). Komodo level 19 is losing to Pawnee at 3' + 2" at full speed but only by 104 elo after 24 games, which means it should be something like the level that Fritz 2 would have achieved with a 25 to 1 speedup from what it had in 1994! That would mean it would crush even Carlsen at blitz, but that doesn't seem to be right, as it has just mixed results vs. Naka and MVL at "slow blitz". Something seems wrong here, not sure what. Anyway, Lc0 11248 totally crushes Komodo level 19 giving it knight odds, even though Komodo does know to exchange major pieces when up a knight.mwyoung wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2019 12:59 pmI looked up the rating for Fritz 2 and Gideon pro. From the 1993 computer chess reports. Gideon pro was rated about 100 elo better then Fritz 2. Tested on a 486 with 4mb of HT.mwyoung wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2019 6:05 amI have tested all of these in the past, and they have worked. And they are the right vintage...lkaufman wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2019 5:21 amI didn't remember these two events, but I suppose it makes sense that overall Fritz 2 would perform maybe 2750 or so at blitz overall mostly on a Pentium, because Rexchess performed in the 2500s around 1990 on a 486, and Fritz 2 was later and stronger. Considering the hardware avancement since the Pentium, I suppose that the estimates of raising CCRL blitz ratings by 500 for FIDE blitz rating equivalence should be revised upward quite a bit. I don't know if I even have any engine weak enough to play the same level on my 5 Ghz I7 as Fritz 2 did on a Pentium! Well, there's always the handicapped levels of Komodo, one of them must be suitable. But I'd have to have a weak enough engine to run it against to determine which level that would be! Any suggestions of engines of that level that are easy to download and problem-free?mwyoung wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2019 4:59 amI found 2 games of Fritz 2 from 1992. Scoring 1-1 Playing GM Kasparov. Fritz could be playing on a 386 or 486 processor in 1992. My guess would be the 486.mwyoung wrote: ↑Tue Apr 09, 2019 4:38 amHello Larry,lkaufman wrote: ↑Sun Apr 07, 2019 4:32 pmIn blitz (let's say 3' + 2" or as close to this as possible), the top engines today are far beyond human level. But how far down the list do we have to go to find engines (and specified hardware) that score evenly against GMs, preferably ones with known identities and ratings? I'm sure there is plenty of data to answer this question as countless games have been played online over the years, but does anyone actually have some data, such as "Engine xyz on one thread scored 50% against GMs averaging 2600 FIDE" for example? The question I'd like to answer is: How much would we have to add to CCRL blitz ratings to estimate the FIDE blitz rating of a human GM who would score 50% against it at 3' + 2"?
It looks like you are going to have to go down to the bottom of the list.
Here is a news report from 1994. About how Fritz 2 won against all the worlds best in 1994 in 5m blitz games.
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-ente ... 38085.html
In 1994 at the time of the news report. The best processor was the Pentium.
And the report says: "When Intel sponsored the World Chess Express Challenge in Munich last Friday, they could never have hoped for such a good advertisement for their high-speed Pentium processor. It turned a good computer - Fritz 2 - into a world beater.:"
Intel introduces and ships faster Pentium chips, based on 0.6 micron BiCMOS manufacturing. The processor now includes clock-doubling of 1.5 or 2 time the external clock rate, allowing processor speeds of up to 100 MHz on a 50-66 MHz system bus. The processor also includes power management capabilities to allow stopping and restarting the processor. Code-name during development was P54C. The 60/90 MHz Pentium 735 processor is rated at 149.8 MIPS, and is priced at US$849 in 1000 unit quantities. The 66/100 MHz Pentium 815 processor is rated at 166.3 MIPS, and is priced at US$995 in 1000 unit quantities. [205.98]   [550.29] [551.168,259] [557.134] [584.43] [689.115] 
Put your laptop on power saving mode, and or use less time.
So if you have SF6, you can compare results.
"Intel Pentium I 75Mhz 6200nps/7400nps External cache 256kb COMP=i586 (Command bench=7465nps)"
A modern i7 should be like 8+ times as fast at the same clock speed. (conservative estimate)
A more liberal estimate of mine is that a modern i7 would be around 15 times as fast at 0.1 ghz. (single core)
And I assume Fritz used an opening book, which should help somewhat.
Either way I tested Igel vs the Play Magnus app* (age 28) with Igel search till depth 15.
Igel trivially beat Magnus as black. But I also realized depth 15 for Igel isn't very blitz.
Maybe I'll try again tomorrow and just limit nodes per move for Igel instead of a set depth.
*Uses a modifed Glaurung set at a specific strength + opening book to mimic Magnus.
But I can believe it.
Engines have a massive advantage in Blitz.
I just assumed that something called "Play Magnus" was just a gimmick; is there solid reason to believe that it has actually proven itself equal to Magnus at some level or levels and if so what time limit was he playing under? Of course it also matters whether he actually had incentive to win if such games were played. Presumably it's best to set an opposing engine to time plus inc rather than nodes or depth, since that is the normal standard for chess these days.
The score for Lc0 11248 (on 2080) vs. Pawny 0.2 (on 5 GHz i7) at 3' + 2" giving knight odds was 15.5 to 4.5 for Lc0. So Lc0 totally crushes an engine at knight odds which it would seem from the discussion should overwhelm even Magnus at 3' + 2".
The app is blitz, there are a few videos of Magnus playing it as blitz.
Either way, I do really think Pawny 0.2 on a strong modern CPU should be enough to crush Magnus.
But maybe specific anti-computer tactics lead to inconsistensies.