 
 Of course too few games to conclude anything about their strength, but still Fat Fritz seems extremely strong!
Conditions:
Time control 1 minute + 1 second/move.
TCEC's Season 16 superfinal openings(50 so 100 games).
Stockfish dev (14 November 2019) with 30 cores on a Threadripper 2990WX 32cores/64 threads at 3.1 GHz.
Fat Fritz v266 with RTX 2080+2060 and 2 threads of the above 2990WX.
FatFritz(FF) was getting some 45 kN/s and Stockfish(SF) some 38 MN/s.
Full 3,4,5,6 and some 7 men syzygy TBs on NVME M.2 SSD.
I have chosen 30 cores for SF in order to get the same nodes per second ratio of SF/FF compared to TCEC so the performances could be similar to TCEC's.
Result:
FatFritz_v266 - Stockfish_141119, +19 -15 =66, 52.0-48.0, +14±40 Elo, LOS=75.4 %
In fact Chessbase with its 2 articles boycotted itself in promoting Fat Fritz!

As in the matches of the Chessbase articles, SF was having 16 000 000 N/s while FF 11 000 N/s.
If you compare this SF/FF N/s ratio is about 1.69 times bigger than what TCEC has for SF/T40_Leela so for SF/FF also(as T40's and FF's speed is similar as they use the same binary and nets are both 20x256).
So they gave a very big advantage to Stockfish over Fat Fritz compared to TCEC that they probably wanted to compare.
That is bad advertisement!
 They showed just +15 Elo performance of FF over SF-10 while by using a more comparable N/s ratio closer to TCEC, its difference would be even +50 Elo or more.
 They showed just +15 Elo performance of FF over SF-10 while by using a more comparable N/s ratio closer to TCEC, its difference would be even +50 Elo or more.E.g just by using fp16 for FF in the Leela's Lc0 binary they would get a x3 N/s so some 40-60 Elo more.


