The price of multi-processor / 64 bit engines

[James Constance]

I wonder what people feel is a fair price to charge for a multi-processor or 64 bit engine when compared to the 32 bit single processor version. Are you happy to pay twice the price for the deep version, or do you think it would be better if it were somewhat cheaper?

[Dirt]

It's hard to say. At this point it might make sense to give away the SP version since no serious player would be satisfied with it.

[James Constance]

Of course, it does depend on how expensive the SP version is in the first place: if the price of the SP version was halved, then it would be much harder to object to paying twice the price for a MP version.

I assumed on making the poll that the cost of the SP versions remained as they are now.

Personally I find the SP versions quite expensive enough as they are, and would find it difficult to justify paying twice the amount if I had a MP system.

[Spock]

iphone versions are cheaper, are Shredder and Hiarcs $US 10 ?
(if you have an iphone..) Entirely different usage pattern for those versions though

[towforce]

Vendors should enjoy the bonanza while it lasts. We have seen in the past that a high price for good chess software is not sustainable.

[Peter Skinner]

If this question had been asked 5-10 yrs ago, I would have said that twice the price is fair.

Dual/Quad systems were not as common as today, thus for a MP version, it made sense to double the price.

Now, with dual/quad core machines being the norm everywhere, I think the market has changed significantly. It makes little to no sense anymore to purchase SP versions of programs when you have the ability for the MP versions. Also it is becoming common place to see systems sold with Windows Vista x64 due to 4+gb of memory installed by default.

I just saw an Intel Q8200 system with 6GB memory and a 1TB hard drive on sale at Costco for $479 CDN yesterday. To boot it also came with a 20" LCD monitor, and Windows Vista Home Premium x64. That is completely insane pricing.

Even laptops are coming out with quad core cpus and greater than 4gb memory.

If I was a chess developer, I would be concentrating on MP versions instead of the SP versions unless they are for mobile devices. I would raise my default price and only sell MP versions. iPhone and Windows Mobile programs are going to be increasingly popular as those devices get faster and have more memory.

That is the area I would be really aggressive in getting market share. So I voted the same price. From a marketing standpoint, it is the only one that makes the most sense and would actually cater to customers. I personally would never consider dropping money on a SP version of any program. I will also never purchase another chess engine that isn't UCI or WB2 compatible. (I hope you're listening Chessbase)

While I want the engines, I don't personally like the Chessbase interface. I much prefer Winboard, Shredder's GUI, or Chess Partner, as the interface should take up as little resources as possible. Also playing strength is not the major factor in purchasing a program. I prefer certain engines due to playing style and editable parameters. The entertainment factor is paramount for me.

Peter

[BubbaTough]

removing SMP functionality if someone doesn't pay more seems pretty silly to me. Its like selling one version (a good version) and another version (the bad version) with a bunch of eval ripped out. For 29$ you can have el dumbo, or for $39 you can have the version that understand about 2 bishops and isolated pawns. Why bother going through the trouble of making an inferior version? If you want to sell your engine for more, sell it for more. Why create a version with functionality ripped out that is cheaper? It just doesn't make any sense to me.

-Sam

[Dann Corbit]

I think they should be priced at whatever the market will dictate.

If the author charges too much, don't buy it.

If the functionality is worth the price to you, then buy it.

We can get the SMP engine Stockfish for $0.00 and it will play like Garry Kasparov's smarter brother. So it's not like we are without any options.

Personally, I like them all and I buy them all. But not everyone is so passionate[*] about their hobbies.

[*] passionate==insane.

[yanquis1972]

It's hard to say. At this point it might make sense to give away the SP version since no serious player would be satisfied with it.

?? i dont know about that. plenty of serious players can probably do fine with todays software on one processor; i dont think most people think about the hardware aspect a great deal. its us geeks who want to squeeze as much juice as possible out of the engines.

i think they should be the same price -- all computers sold these days are multiprocessor -- and i hope rybka will start this tread. vas is a bit of a trendsetter so im confident he'll do it; i think dropping 'deep' from the rybka 3 moniker was a step in that direction.

[Dirt]

I assumed on making the poll that the cost of the SP versions remained as they are now.

I assumed the same when voting, but I really don't think commercial SP engines make sense anymore on the desktop.