Testing Houdini 3.0 Pro

[Tomcass]

Hi Tom + Dr. Deeb,

Do you know where one can download these PeterPan Ivanhoe compiles?

Thanks,
Carl

Hi Carl,

I will try to find the link. Peterpan produced two different compiles with the same name in a very short period of time and I would be sure that I give you the good one.

Regards,

Tom.

[Tomcass]

TESTING Houdini 3 Pro = 60 minutes/game. THIRD LEG

I7 975 3.33 Ghz.
4 real cores
GUI: Fritz 12
Book: Rybka 3.0
Time control: 60 minutes/game
Ponder: Off
No tablebases

50 BNG (Billion Nodes per Game for Houdini).

2010-01, Blitz 60m 0

1 Ivanhoe B50kBx64p(x4)BO +2/=17/-1 52.50% 10.5/20
2 Houdini 3 Pro x64_4 +1/=17/-2 47.50% 9.5/20

http://www.mediafire.com/?75zi11bqpz3givg

... and this is a big surprise for me!. The old PeterPan's Ivanhoe compile has been able to beat the solid Number One Houdini 3.0 Pro. I know that the number of games is very small and that the book selected Rybka 3.0 offers some advantage for Ivan, but most of the games have been extremely tough. Only one defeat after 20 games against this monster is a great result for Ivan.

I will repeat this test (when the heat of my computer goes down) only to try to avoid -or minimize- statistical noise, but I feel impressed by the performance of this Ivanhoe compile.

Best regards from Barcelona.

Tom.

Thanks Tom

One of the compiles of Ivanhoe who ia a permanent participant in my rating list.....

However,there is another extremely strong compile by PeterPan that can even perform better.........
Dr.D

Hi Dr. Deeb,

I can guess what you mean ... but please avoid me the risk to fail. What is this extremely strong PeterPan compile?.

Best regards,

Tom.

[Tomcass]

Hi, Bram.

Your latest post is simply BRILLIANT! Thanks for snorkelling in my past tests to discover this one. We need a lot of additional tests, but the double question is in the air:

1.- Perhaps Houdini 1.5 is stronger than Houdini 3.0 at 60 minutes (about 50 BNG -Billions Node Game-) time control?. I am sure it is not. Therefore...

2.- The main difference between both matches is the book used. Is Rybka 3 book so well tuned against Houdini to produce these abnormal results?.

I will keep testing to check the right asnswer to the second question.

Thanks for this great post, Bram!. Saludos cordiales.

Tom.

[Tomcass]

Yes Critter 1.6a has no respect for number one. In 2 different 20 game matches it has won Houdini 3 in my PC, which surprised me a lot .
After Vida has taken look at Houdini 3 we have again competition?

Hi Jouni!

It would be very nice to have again an engine able to compete with this impressive Houdini 3.0. My forecast:

1.- Critter will not be able to compete at Houdini 3.0 level in the next ... let's say ... two years, under 5 BNG (Billion Nodes Game) time control.

2.- It is not far from Houdini 3.0 today at 50 BNG or higher.

Obviously more tests are needed to confirm my point of view.

Best regards from Barcelona.

Tom.

[carldaman]

Thanks again, Tom -- it would be very interesting to run some tests with it.
I'll be watching this space

Cheers,
Carl

[Lavir]

1.- Perhaps Houdini 1.5 is stronger than Houdini 3.0 at 60 minutes (about 50 BNG -Billions Node Game-) time control?. I am sure it is not. Therefore...

2.- The main difference between both matches is the book used. Is Rybka 3 book so well tuned against Houdini to produce these abnormal results?.

Or maybe, just maybe, the tests are with so little games as to be almost irrelevant given the very high elo error bar?

Just because games are at a slower time control it doesn't mean the rules of probablities don't play a role no more. That would be like saying that just because you throw a dice much slower than usual results are to be taken more seriously than otherwise.

I don't know why but there are many people out there that really belives that playing 50 games at 40/120 mean much much more than 1.000 at 40/2, and I truly cannot understand why. While engines have more time to think, the parameters of the probablities and error bars are still there, they don't vanish just because you increase the time.

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

TESTING Houdini 3 Pro = 60 minutes/game. THIRD LEG

I7 975 3.33 Ghz.
4 real cores
GUI: Fritz 12
Book: Rybka 3.0
Time control: 60 minutes/game
Ponder: Off
No tablebases

50 BNG (Billion Nodes per Game for Houdini).

2010-01, Blitz 60m 0

1 Ivanhoe B50kBx64p(x4)BO +2/=17/-1 52.50% 10.5/20
2 Houdini 3 Pro x64_4 +1/=17/-2 47.50% 9.5/20

http://www.mediafire.com/?75zi11bqpz3givg

... and this is a big surprise for me!. The old PeterPan's Ivanhoe compile has been able to beat the solid Number One Houdini 3.0 Pro. I know that the number of games is very small and that the book selected Rybka 3.0 offers some advantage for Ivan, but most of the games have been extremely tough. Only one defeat after 20 games against this monster is a great result for Ivan.

I will repeat this test (when the heat of my computer goes down) only to try to avoid -or minimize- statistical noise, but I feel impressed by the performance of this Ivanhoe compile.

Best regards from Barcelona.

Tom.

Thanks Tom

One of the compiles of Ivanhoe who ia a permanent participant in my rating list.....

However,there is another extremely strong compile by PeterPan that can even perform better.........
Dr.D

Hi Dr. Deeb,

I can guess what you mean ... but please avoid me the risk to fail. What is this extremely strong PeterPan compile?.

Best regards,

Tom.

Hi Tom

Definitely Ivanhoe-B PP-0.1 x64 .....

Extremely strong compile and I test at relatively long time controls:
20 minutes + 20 seconds increment....
Best regards,
Dr.D

[Tomcass]

1.- Perhaps Houdini 1.5 is stronger than Houdini 3.0 at 60 minutes (about 50 BNG -Billions Node Game-) time control?. I am sure it is not. Therefore...

2.- The main difference between both matches is the book used. Is Rybka 3 book so well tuned against Houdini to produce these abnormal results?.

Or maybe, just maybe, the tests are with so little games as to be almost irrelevant given the very high elo error bar?

Just because games are at a slower time control it doesn't mean the rules of probablities don't play a role no more. That would be like saying that just because you throw a dice much slower than usual results are to be taken more seriously than otherwise.

I don't know why but there are many people out there that really belives that playing 50 games at 40/120 mean much much more than 1.000 at 40/2, and I truly cannot understand why. While engines have more time to think, the parameters of the probablities and error bars are still there, they don't vanish just because you increase the time.

I totally agree with you. From statistical point of view, of course. This is the reason I said that lots of additional testing are needed to minimize statistical noise. I will do it if my 4 cores computer does not suffer from heating very much. It is a true pleasure for me to follow these top level games.

Anyway, this is the first time since Houdini 3.0 appeared that after 20 games in a row, at any time control, Houdini 3.0 has been able to beat ONLY ONCE to his rival. At least AFAIK.

Regards,

Tom.

[Lavir]

Anyway, this is the first time since Houdini 3.0 appeared that after 20 games in a row, at any time control, Houdini 3.0 has been able to beat ONLY ONCE to his rival. At least AFAIK.

Actually it has happened many times in my own tests. An example? Tie together all the Noomen tests, so you have 90 positions; when Houdini 3 comes about the 61 one (122 game), it cannot usually win for about 25 games after against Komodo 5 (or either Critter), to then win 15 in a row just after.

Naturally it is not always repetible, because randomness is a factor, but there are some positions where Houdini has more trouble than others, as every other engine.

[Tomcass]

Anyway, this is the first time since Houdini 3.0 appeared that after 20 games in a row, at any time control, Houdini 3.0 has been able to beat ONLY ONCE to his rival. At least AFAIK.

Actually it has happened many times in my own tests. An example? Tie together all the Noomen tests, so you have 90 positions; when Houdini 3 comes about the 61 one (122 game), it cannot usually win for about 25 games after against Komodo 5 (or either Critter), to then win 15 in a row just after.

Naturally it is not always repetible, because randomness is a factor, but there are some positions where Houdini has more trouble than others, as every other engine.

Thanks for this info, Fabio. In all the tests I followed I have not been able to find such circumstance for Houdini 3.0. I'll keep testing.

Tom.