http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=45902
I took the Shredder 9 UCI as baseline, which appeared almost exactly 10 years ago. Chessbase article on the 1st of March 2005 on the new Shredder:
Shredder 9 on top of the world
http://en.chessbase.com/post/shredder-9 ... -the-world
The SSDF Rating List - July 29, 2005
http://www.chessusa.com/about/ratings/ssdflist.html
Code: Select all
Rating + - Games Won Oppo
------ --- --- ----- --- ----
1 Shredder 9.0 UCI 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2821 28 -27 704 67% 2697
2 Shredder 8.0 CB 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2805 23 -22 1115 71% 2648
3 Shredder 7.04 UCI 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2804 22 -21 1133 69% 2663
4 Junior 9.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2789 27 -26 745 67% 2666
5 Deep Fritz 8.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2783 24 -23 942 70% 2633
6 Junior 8.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2766 24 -24 888 65% 2660
7 Shredder 7.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2765 26 -25 841 69% 2629
8 Deep Fritz 7.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2764 24 -23 938 65% 2654
9 Fritz 8.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2753 21 -20 1206 63% 2659
10 Deep Junior 8.0 256MB Athlon 1200 MHz 2750 30 -29 567 63% 2659
I picked the latest March 2015 Stockfish dev version and pitted it against Shredder 9 at 5s + 0.05s time control, 1000 games:
Score of Stockfish 12.03.2015 vs Shredder 9: 967 - 3 - 30 [0.982] 1000
ELO difference: 695
Finished match
Average game was ~43 moves long, compared to ~60 in Stockfish self-tests, so there were many fast wins by Stockfish against Shredder 9.
Then, to quantify the eval and search improvements I performed the following:
1/ Shredder 9 UCI follows literally the UCI command "go nodes X" even for small X. Stockfish does not for small X.
2/ Stockfish foolows well "go depth N" command, so to test the eval I used "go depth 1" for Stockfish.
3/ Observed nodes of Stockfish on 20 positions to depth=1 are: endgame~30 nodes, opening~80 nodes. I took the average 60 nodes.
4/ I pitted Stockfish depth=1 against Shredder 9 nodes=60 and the mostly eval result is the following:
Score of Stockfish 12.03.2015 vs Shredder 9: 704 - 158 - 138 [0.773] 1000
ELO difference: 213
Finished match
If this has some meaning and the node count is total, including QS nodes for both engines, the breakdown of improvement during the last 10 years would be:
~400 Elo points from improved search.
~200 Elo points from improved eval.
~100 Elo points from hardware, on equal, but not suited to Shredder 9 hardware (64 bit, new instructions, compiler optimizations due to new hardware).