Engine recommendation

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderator: Ras

User avatar
hgm
Posts: 28515
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
Location: Amsterdam
Full name: H G Muller

Re: Engine recommendation

Post by hgm »

Note that the OP explicitly asked for UCI engines. WHich are rather rare in this Elo range.

I thought Roce was UCI and pretty stable.
User avatar
Evert
Posts: 2929
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 12:42 am
Location: NL

Re: Engine recommendation

Post by Evert »

SjaakII can run as an UCI engine.

No idea if it fits the Elo range though, I never specifically tried to get an elo-estimate for it (certainly not for regular chess).
Werewolf
Posts: 2089
Joined: Thu Sep 18, 2008 10:24 pm
Full name: Carl Bicknell

Re: Engine recommendation

Post by Werewolf »

I've played around with Ed's Gideon Pro from 1993 which is basically the Mephisto RISC II in UCI form. However, on modern hardware - even on a single core - it's up to 800 times faster than the RISC II and plays at about 2500 elo at a guess which is too strong for what I want.

If I raise the bar to 2200 elo - can anyone suggest anything now?!
User avatar
hgm
Posts: 28515
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
Location: Amsterdam
Full name: H G Muller

Re: Engine recommendation

Post by hgm »

What was wrong with Roce? Or do you need a number of those engines?

The CCRL rating list is full of engines from 1900-2200, and I expect most of those to be quite stable. I just don't know which of those are UCI; they don;t mention that.
User avatar
Ajedrecista
Posts: 2253
Joined: Wed Jul 13, 2011 9:04 pm
Location: Madrid, Spain.

Re: Engine recommendation.

Post by Ajedrecista »

Hello Carl:
Werewolf wrote:Hi,

I am interested in doing some testing to evaluate the style of play of well known chess engines. To do this I would like them to play a "dummy" - an engine around 1800 elo. Please could someone recommend:

- a 1800 elo (ish) UCI engine
- must be 100% stable, capable of playing 1000 games without crashing
- able to run on a 64 bit windows OS

Many thanks.
I think that Faile is extremely stable from what I read in the past... however it is WB, not UCI. It has a rating of 1979 ± 10 at CCRL 40/4 (version 1.4.4). Some links:

Faile homepage - downloads

Faile in WBEC

I do not know if it is only w32 or not. I know, your first and third conditions are not completely covered, but the second one should be fully covered.

Regarding WB issue, maybe WB2UCI adapter can do the trick? Good luck.

Regards from Spain.

Ajedrecista.
User avatar
Steve Maughan
Posts: 1348
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 8:28 pm
Location: Florida, USA

Re: Engine recommendation

Post by Steve Maughan »

My old engine "Monarch" is just over 2000 ELO and is really stable.

You can find it here:

http://www.monarchchess.com

Hope it works out OK,

- Steve
http://www.chessprogramming.net - Juggernaut & Maverick Chess Engine
User avatar
hgm
Posts: 28515
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
Location: Amsterdam
Full name: H G Muller

Re: Engine recommendation.

Post by hgm »

w32 programs can run on 64-bit Windows systems without problems.
jdart
Posts: 4435
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 5:23 am
Location: http://www.arasanchess.org

Re: Engine recommendation

Post by jdart »

Stockfish can be set to a user-specified strength via UCI options. Arasan has this feature too.

--Jon
Dayffd
Posts: 424
Joined: Wed Sep 30, 2009 5:30 am

Re: Engine recommendation

Post by Dayffd »

Would Bam Bam work for you? Or ealy versions of Firefly, e.g. Firefly 1.40? So far I've never had any problems with them under a Fritz GUI.
Werewolf wrote:Hi,

I am interested in doing some testing to evaluate the style of play of well known chess engines. To do this I would like them to play a "dummy" - an engine around 1800 elo. Please could someone recommend:

- a 1800 elo (ish) UCI engine
- must be 100% stable, capable of playing 1000 games without crashing
- able to run on a 64 bit windows OS

Many thanks.
David S.
User avatar
Evert
Posts: 2929
Joined: Sat Jan 22, 2011 12:42 am
Location: NL

Re: Engine recommendation

Post by Evert »

I still reckon SjaakII might be roughly of the right strength.