NAUM 4 for PPC, anyone tried?
Moderator: Ras
-
- Posts: 3726
- Joined: Thu Mar 16, 2006 7:10 pm
Re: NAUM 4 for PPC, anyone tried?
I don't understand ... did you have ponder ON using the same PPC? Or did you use 2 different PPC's. I think if it is only 1 PPC best would be to keep ponder OFF.
-
- Posts: 644
- Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 3:11 am
- Location: New Zealand
Re: NAUM 4 for PPC, anyone tried?
I used 2 separate identical PPC's.In the mean time I have been sent an updated Naum engine which says it is about 10% faster.I have played some more games and they are hard to separate.
What is the difference for the normal PC versions, as I expected Naum 4 to be clearly better.
What is the difference for the normal PC versions, as I expected Naum 4 to be clearly better.
-
- Posts: 644
- Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 3:11 am
- Location: New Zealand
Re: NAUM 4 for PPC, anyone tried?
After some more testing it is becoming clearer that PF3 with Hiarcs 12.1 is better than PGM with Naum 4.I have tested both on difficult test positions and Hiarcs finds the key moves much faster, alot of the times Hiarcs finds the key in an instant, while Naum can take a good few seconds.Other times Hiarcs will find key after a few seconds while Naum takes over 10 seconds, etc.
To make sure that Hiarcs was not getting an unfair advantage due to better book, I set up some positions with the first rank shuffled as in FRC and had each engine play a game with each colour.Naum would quite often get O.K positions with even Hiarcs agreeing that Naum is much better but only to draw or lose later in the game.After 6 test games Hiarcs had 4 wins and 2 draws.It seems to me that Naum lacks the killer instinct that Hiarcs shows.
This testing of mine has created some confusion as to the correllation one can draw from the big PC versions when ported to the PPC platform.Because from the various reports I hear that Naum 4 is on a par with Rybka 2.2 and Rybka 2.2 is much better than Hiarcs 12.1.
Could there be some underlying reason with the way various engines can make the port to a native version for PPC.
To make sure that Hiarcs was not getting an unfair advantage due to better book, I set up some positions with the first rank shuffled as in FRC and had each engine play a game with each colour.Naum would quite often get O.K positions with even Hiarcs agreeing that Naum is much better but only to draw or lose later in the game.After 6 test games Hiarcs had 4 wins and 2 draws.It seems to me that Naum lacks the killer instinct that Hiarcs shows.
This testing of mine has created some confusion as to the correllation one can draw from the big PC versions when ported to the PPC platform.Because from the various reports I hear that Naum 4 is on a par with Rybka 2.2 and Rybka 2.2 is much better than Hiarcs 12.1.
Could there be some underlying reason with the way various engines can make the port to a native version for PPC.
-
- Posts: 644
- Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2007 3:11 am
- Location: New Zealand
Re: NAUM 4 for PPC, anyone tried?
Naum 4 is now also available as an extra engine for PocketFritz3 for 20 euro.I don't know why the PF3 version cost 5 euro more than PGM.Think I might save up for when Rybka makes an entance.But Naum is setting a high price just for an engine.
Re: NAUM 4 for PPC, anyone tried?
I already had PGM , so I'm quite happy to have Naum, which is now the
Strongest engine under PGM.
PGM supports the DGT board and has a nice interface.
Probably in the next update of PGM the multiple PV will be implemented.
It's already in the To Do list of Kai
Strongest engine under PGM.
PGM supports the DGT board and has a nice interface.
Probably in the next update of PGM the multiple PV will be implemented.
It's already in the To Do list of Kai