our actual rating lists are online and can be found under the attached links.
40 / 20:
New games: 1222; 35 different engines
Total: 608.072
NEW Engines 571 Deuterium v12.01.030.1070 x64: 2519 - 548 games (+ 5 to prev. version) Octochess r4690 x64 1CPU: 2552 - 186 games (good start with + 66 to prev. version - but 15 games deleted as lost in time with Octochess!!) Pro Deo 1.8.1: 2472 - 148 games (no good start here too - it is -20 in our blitz -list)
UPDATES 62 Equinox 1.35 x64 4CPU: 2924 - 2462 games (+1) 657 Rotor 0.7: 2474 - 689 games (-12)
40 / 4:
No update this week - see more tests in our forum.
Werner wrote: Octochess r4690 x64 1CPU: 2552 - 186 games (good start with + 66 to prev. version - but 15 games deleted as lost in time with Octochess!!)
That's bad. If I might ask, which operating system are you testing on? Are you using Octochess with UCI or Winboard protocol?
Hi Tim,
following conditions:
Windows 7 64bit
ivy bridge processor
using sse4 version
Shredder GUI - UCI engine
40/10 ponder off
Time losses have been mostly at time control like move 40/80
Hope you can help
Werner wrote:Hi Tim,
following conditions:
Windows 7 64bit
ivy bridge processor
using sse4 version
Shredder GUI - UCI engine
40/10 ponder off
Time losses have been mostly at time control like move 40/80
Hope you can help
Thanks, that narrows it down considerably. There has been a bug in UCI mode where the deadline to stop the calculation did not consider some internal overhead, this has already been fixed.
One further question: Have you been using the official build or a third-party compile? In particular, Octochess r4692 JA suffers from a threading bug that is likely to cause your problem.
Hi Tim,
I did use the official compile, not the JA version:
octochess-windows-sse4-r4690.exe 1.489.408 16.07.2012 23:04 -a--
As I will make more games, it would be nice to have the bugfix
our actual rating lists are online and can be found under the attached links.
40 / 20:
New games: 1222; 35 different engines
Total: 608.072
NEW Engines 571 Deuterium v12.01.030.1070 x64: 2519 - 548 games (+ 5 to prev. version) Octochess r4690 x64 1CPU: 2552 - 186 games (good start with + 66 to prev. version - but 15 games deleted as lost in time with Octochess!!) Pro Deo 1.8.1: 2472 - 148 games (no good start here too - it is -20 in our blitz -list)
UPDATES 62 Equinox 1.35 x64 4CPU: 2924 - 2462 games (+1) 657 Rotor 0.7: 2474 - 689 games (-12)
40 / 4:
No update this week - see more tests in our forum.
Question: What is the actual hardware and actual time limit used for most of the 40/4 games now? What time limit on some brand new Intel computer, say at 3 GHz, would be closest to what you actually use on average? We're trying to find out why our results for Komodo are consistently better at blitz than those reported by both CCRL and CEGT, even with our opening book modified to me more typical of others. Also, is it possible to see whether the ratings of the top few single-core engines would be much different if only pairings among them were rated?
Larry, I'd also be curious as to the GUI used for testing. As I noted in another thread, Komodo5 using the default drawscore of -7 suffers when tested on the FRitz GUI. I had to set the drawscore to 0 to ensure that Komodo did not make obviously weak moves.
That's bad. If I might ask, which operating system are you testing on? Are you using Octochess with UCI or Winboard protocol?