yanquis1972 wrote:4CPU @ 3ghz, ponder off. i forget what i set the hash at now :/
i was surprised at first but the performance is actually in line with what you'd expect from a top toga engine according to ccrl 4/40. i watched the first couple games before going to bed & it looked like naum just slowly grinds TK into dust (like he does most opponents).
Naum is a monster....Even this Toga is far away from his league
Dr.D
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….
It's a pity that some people don't show any result..so this is better then nothing..10 or 1000 games...if i let every engine play against each other 10 games i come easy on 1000 games.
You have people who always complain...just be happy to see results from people who spend there free time on it!!
jpqy wrote:It's a pity that some people don't show any result..so this is better then nothing..10 or 1000 games...if i let every engine play against each other 10 games i come easy on 1000 games.
You have people who always complain...just be happy to see results from people who spend there free time on it!!
JP.
Actually it is _not_ "better than nothing". Unless you consider a completely random number to be "better than nothing"...
the results he posted are quite a bit better than nothing, obviously. you can glance at them & get a fairly good idea of TK's strength (id guess about 3000+ CCRL elo). even if i'm off by a long shot, i'm going to be a lot closer than i would if we just had random results, because chess is not random chaos. in fact it's much farther removed from chance than almost any game i can think of.
anyway, it's anyone's choice how to use their hardware & software & by looking at the results posted & combining them with mine i can see that naum is probably not some kind of special poision for TK, but that its performance was what should be expected.
yanquis1972 wrote:the results he posted are quite a bit better than nothing, obviously. you can glance at them & get a fairly good idea of TK's strength (id guess about 3000+ CCRL elo). even if i'm off by a long shot, i'm going to be a lot closer than i would if we just had random results, because chess is not random chaos. in fact it's much farther removed from chance than almost any game i can think of.
anyway, it's anyone's choice how to use their hardware & software & by looking at the results posted & combining them with mine i can see that naum is probably not some kind of special poision for TK, but that its performance was what should be expected.
My point was that 10 games is worthless for determining anything. In a 1000 game match, you can probably find 10 games in a row where each side wins. If you trust 10 game results, that's up to you. I know the inaccuracy this involves.
Hi Dr.D,
in the list of TTK engines there are 2 st labeled a and b.I see that TTK st b was used in the games.Is there any difference between a and b or that is not important.
Thanks
solis wrote:Hi Dr.D,
in the list of TTK engines there are 2 st labeled a and b.I see that TTK st b was used in the games.Is there any difference between a and b or that is not important.
Thanks
Hi,
No difference I think....one of them was made to work under the Chessbase GUI if the other one fails....
Dr.D
_No one can hit as hard as life.But it ain’t about how hard you can hit.It’s about how hard you can get hit and keep moving forward.How much you can take and keep moving forward….
jpqy wrote:It's a pity that some people don't show any result..so this is better then nothing..10 or 1000 games...if i let every engine play against each other 10 games i come easy on 1000 games.
You have people who always complain...just be happy to see results from people who spend there free time on it!!
JP.
Actually it is _not_ "better than nothing". Unless you consider a completely random number to be "better than nothing"...
