Nobody seems to be able to reproduce this result at more normal time controls, can you?Laskos wrote:Code: Select all
Games Completed = 850 of 10000 (Avg game length = 7.112 sec) Settings = RR/16MB/50ms per move/M 700000cp for 1000 moves, D 3000 moves/PGN:C:\Users\Downloads\LittleBlitzer\swcr.pgn(5120) Time = 10402 sec elapsed, 111972 sec remaining 1. Houdini 1.5a w32 370.0/850 202-312-336 (L: m=312 t=0 i=0 a=0) (D: r=254 i=41 f=40 s=1 a=0) (tpm=47.4 d=11.4 nps=1076409) 2. Strelka 5.5 480.0/850 312-202-336 (L: m=202 t=0 i=0 a=0) (D: r=254 i=41 f=40 s=1 a=0) (tpm=55.5 d=12.1 nps=968204)
Code: Select all
Program Score % Elo + - Draws 1 Strelka 5.5 : 480.0/850 56.5 3223 18 18 39.5 % 2 Houdini 1.5a w32 : 370.0/850 43.5 3177 18 18 39.5 %
I wasted some CPU time to play an 8000-game match between Houdini 1.5a and Strelka 5.5 at time control 8"+0.08". Houdini 1.5a won:
Code: Select all
1 Houdini 1.5a w32 12 8000.0 (4280.5 : 3719.5)
8000.0 (4280.5 : 3719.5)
2 Strelka 5.5 -12 8000.0 (3719.5 : 4280.5)
8000.0 (3719.5 : 4280.5)
In analysis Strelka 5.5 and Strelka 5.1 produce nearly identical results - very often even identical node counts - the changes between the two versions must be minimal.
As far as I can see, Strelka 5.5 is still 99% search and eval of Houdini 1.5, with some other parts (e.g. the time management) taken from the Ivanhoe source.
In view of that, the reactions in this thread are hilarious...


Robert