Thank you very much, Koh. But let me ask you this. When you say you "believe" this is it, are you sure enough that you think I could go ahead and run the matches now- or do you think I should wait for confirmation from him or Gary or whatever. Tell me what you think would be best.
And thanks much,
george
My opinion is that it is probably the fastest on your machine but
I believe that the question which one is the fastest is dependent on the machine that you use.
It is possible simply to run the exe with no interface and type bench and see how much time stockfish needs to finish it(It is only a few seconds).
The version that needs less time is the best for you.
My Norton AV (granted, not the best anymore) identifies this file as a "threat" named WS.Reputation.1
Norton may well be wrong, but I do wonder why the heck it would misidentify it in the first place.
FYI,
CL
I am not sure- and I certainly appreciate you telling me this. But if it makes you feel any better, McAfee scans every download of mine and saw this one as ok. If it didn't, it would have warnings plastered all over the screen. But maybe McAfee missed something that Norton picked up. Tough call either way- but thank you.
All the best,
george
PS: I had put it in a folder and I opened the folder and scanned the exe again. McAfee again found no issues with it. But don't just go by what I say. Maybe it is better to err on the side of caution.
Best,
George,
I know occasionally Norton picks up engine executables as false-positive "threats", but it hadn't done so recently with the Stockfish updates, which I have been downloading regularly, until this one. I hope others can weigh on this to make sure it is a false positive.
By the way, Norton scanned and automatically deleted the SF executable from my system so I could not do anything about it.
Thank you very much, Koh. But let me ask you this. When you say you "believe" this is it, are you sure enough that you think I could go ahead and run the matches now- or do you think I should wait for confirmation from him or Gary or whatever. Tell me what you think would be best.
And thanks much,
george
My opinion is that it is probably the fastest on your machine but
I believe that the question which one is the fastest is dependent on the machine that you use.
It is possible simply to run the exe with no interface and type bench and see how much time stockfish needs to finish it(It is only a few seconds).
The version that needs less time is the best for you.
Uri
I am running an Alienware Aurora R4, Intel 6core overclocked- blindingly fast. But that is not the issue. Which are the ones that I choose from? I just cannot go digging around thru a bunch of versions. Give me some kind of list to download from, if you don't mind.
My Norton AV (granted, not the best anymore) identifies this file as a "threat" named WS.Reputation.1
Norton may well be wrong, but I do wonder why the heck it would misidentify it in the first place.
FYI,
CL
I am not sure- and I certainly appreciate you telling me this. But if it makes you feel any better, McAfee scans every download of mine and saw this one as ok. If it didn't, it would have warnings plastered all over the screen. But maybe McAfee missed something that Norton picked up. Tough call either way- but thank you.
All the best,
george
PS: I had put it in a folder and I opened the folder and scanned the exe again. McAfee again found no issues with it. But don't just go by what I say. Maybe it is better to err on the side of caution.
Best,
George,
I know occasionally Norton picks up engine executables as false-positive "threats", but it hadn't done so recently with the Stockfish updates, which I have been downloading regularly, until this one. I hope others can weigh on this to make sure it is a false positive.
By the way, Norton scanned and automatically deleted the SF executable from my system so I could not do anything about it.
Since Uri is the person who brought this up, to be 100% sure, I guess Uri is the right person to reply to you.
Best wishes,
Koh, Kah Huat
I really appreciate your help. This is what happens tho when you got versions scattered to hell and back, and none of them just have a name of their own that makes it easy. Personally I don't think anyone knows the strongest in this fiasco at the moment. Millisecond controls running Stockfish against Stockfish is a terrible way to test anything- I don't give a damn who tells you it isn't.
