tomorrow morning at 9 CETGK2000 wrote:When will the games start, day and time?
Thanks in advance.
Schedule is here http://icga.org/?p=2343
Moderators: Harvey Williamson, Steve B, Watchman
tomorrow morning at 9 CETGK2000 wrote:When will the games start, day and time?
Thanks in advance.
Are you sure? Last year it was quad i7, 3.4 GHz, 16MB Hash. I'd be surprised if they backslid in performance. And isn't the i9 out now?Harvey Williamson wrote:It is an i7 quad at 1.8Rob Appleby wrote:What hardware will the software be running on?
I guess so. This is the exact quote from the webpage:IanO wrote:Are you sure? Last year it was quad i7, 3.4 GHz, 16MB Hash. I'd be surprised if they backslid in performance.Harvey Williamson wrote:It is an i7 quad at 1.8Rob Appleby wrote:What hardware will the software be running on?
So it might even be SP!The used hardware is a Dell laptop with i7-8550U, 1.80 GHz processor. 16 GByte internal memory installed. The system is running MS Windows 10, on an x64 processor.
Harvey Williamson wrote:The event will take place this weekend in Stockholm. At the moment there are 9 entries including Hiarcs. I am not sure what I will do if England get to the World Cup final as the last round is scheduled at the same time. Hopefully I will be able to publish a link so that you can watch the games live in HCE. The WCSC is the uniform hardware event. Entries so far:
1. Chiron
2. Shredder
3. Komodo
4. Pauline
5. Booot
6. The Baron
7. Ginkgo
8. Jonny
9. Hiarcs
It really surprised me, because I tried engine match between latest version of The Baron engine and Hiarcs 14 WCSC. Hiarcs won every single game (10 games, 10 wins). It is quite unlikely that The Baron is now so much stronger than before. I still do not know how much stronger are new versions of Hiarcs than Hiarcs 14 WCSC, because of its unbalanced performance. I suppose Hiarcs did quite well against Shredder and Komodo, but games against Booot and The Baron were disappointing.Carl Bicknell wrote:They can't be pleased with that.
I didn't think it was particularly attacking. It did, however, do a very good job of squeezing Shredder but sadly there was no win.
No idea about the loss to the Baron. Maybe they wacked contempt right up to try and win at all costs and it backfired.
Hiarcs is not so fast, because of its evaluation function. In my opinion Hiarcs is able to play "human-like" chess because of its good evaluation function. Maybe I am wrong. Mark or Harvey should tell us more about it.Rob Appleby wrote:My impression is that it just takes HIARCS a lot longer to analyse to a given depth than other engines. Give it time and it's very useful, but it's not fast.
HIARCS is fun to play against and very useful as an alternative analysis for iccf games imo. Beyond that I really can't comment, except to say that in a series of engine matches I ran recently against stockfish, it didn't win a single game.herO wrote:Hiarcs is not so fast, because of its evaluation function. In my opinion Hiarcs is able to play "human-like" chess because of its good evaluation function. Maybe I am wrong. Mark or Harvey should tell us more about it.Rob Appleby wrote:My impression is that it just takes HIARCS a lot longer to analyse to a given depth than other engines. Give it time and it's very useful, but it's not fast.
You're right. Hiarcs is not able to win against Stockfish engine. Hiarcs is only able to draw against Stockfish. Hiarcs cannot win against Stockfish even if Hiarcs uses tournament book and Stockfish does not have any opening book.Rob Appleby wrote:HIARCS is fun to play against and very useful as an alternative analysis for iccf games imo. Beyond that I really can't comment, except to say that in a series of engine matches I ran recently against stockfish, it didn't win a single game.herO wrote:Hiarcs is not so fast, because of its evaluation function. In my opinion Hiarcs is able to play "human-like" chess because of its good evaluation function. Maybe I am wrong. Mark or Harvey should tell us more about it.Rob Appleby wrote:My impression is that it just takes HIARCS a lot longer to analyse to a given depth than other engines. Give it time and it's very useful, but it's not fast.