Welcome to Chess2U - The Ultimate Computer Chess Forum!
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post and use all thefeatures of the Chess2U forums. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Message [Page 1 of 1]
ChessRockers 1.0:
Password: chessrockers
Worked for me.
ChessRockers 1.1: No password needed, but 7zpacker didnt work. Use latest RarZilla. That worked for me. But only 64bit Popcount and BMI2 versions.
Password: chessrockers
Worked for me.
ChessRockers 1.1: No password needed, but 7zpacker didnt work. Use latest RarZilla. That worked for me. But only 64bit Popcount and BMI2 versions.
Its obviously a Stockfish-derivative. But the testresults posted here are incredible (more than 63% against Komodo 9.2...) and suggest, that ChessRockers 1.0 is measureable stronger than the latest Stockfish-Dev.
I doubt that. But I will give ChessRockers 1.0 (64bit, Popcount) a try and play some thousand games with my SPCC test-conditions (http://spcc.beepworld.de ).
Then we will have a independent and valid result of ChessRockers 1.0. (Test of ChessRockers 1.1 will only follow, if ChessRockers 1.0 is really stronger than the latest Stockfish-Dev).
Stay tuned!
I doubt that. But I will give ChessRockers 1.0 (64bit, Popcount) a try and play some thousand games with my SPCC test-conditions (http://spcc.beepworld.de ).
Then we will have a independent and valid result of ChessRockers 1.0. (Test of ChessRockers 1.1 will only follow, if ChessRockers 1.0 is really stronger than the latest Stockfish-Dev).
Stay tuned!
pass = chessrockers
it works
it works
________________
Ch355 2 u m3mb3r WALDEMAR...g00d g4m3 f0r 4ll...y4h000000!
@pohl4711 wrote:Its obviously a Stockfish-derivative. But the testresults posted here are incredible (more than 63% against Komodo 9.2...) and suggest, that ChessRockers 1.0 is measureable stronger than the latest Stockfish-Dev.
I doubt that. But I will give ChessRockers 1.0 (64bit, Popcount) a try and play some thousand games with my SPCC test-conditions (http://spcc.beepworld.de ).
Then we will have a independent and valid result of ChessRockers 1.0. (Test of ChessRockers 1.1 will only follow, if ChessRockers 1.0 is really stronger than the latest Stockfish-Dev).
Stay tuned!
analyzing the files of this "garbage" I found the 99.99999% of equality with Stockfish. Out of curiosity I issued a challenge with the same Stockfish than a week old and this is the partial result ....
I75960x
Perfect book 2015t
time 3 '+ 0 "
TB 5 men syzygy
LP on for ChessRockers 1.0
conclusions:
a waste of time....
"garbage",,why..is a Stockfish, but, a more recent,...maybe.. a sf 021115...is something creative, to test my books..with another personality.... Im using 1.1 64
Last edited by ADY125 on Wed Nov 25, 2015 6:18 pm; edited 2 times in total
@Alexa1978 wrote:
analyzing the files of this "garbage" I found the 99.99999% of equality with Stockfish. Out of curiosity I issued a challenge with the same Stockfish than a week old and this is the partial result ....
I75960x
Perfect book 2015t
time 3 '+ 0 "
TB 5 men syzygy
LP on for ChessRockers 1.0
conclusions:
a waste of time....
OK. Thanx for this information. Because at the moment no functional patches of Stockfish are released, I have some free CPU-time. So it is no problem to play some thousand games with ChessRockers. Each new engine release should get one chance. I am a curious tester, too.
And 2000-3000 games will prove, if ChessRockers ist junk or a real progress.
Regards - Stefan
friend, please let us know everything a boat it.....@pohl4711 wrote:@Alexa1978 wrote:
analyzing the files of this "garbage" I found the 99.99999% of equality with Stockfish. Out of curiosity I issued a challenge with the same Stockfish than a week old and this is the partial result ....
I75960x
Perfect book 2015t
time 3 '+ 0 "
TB 5 men syzygy
LP on for ChessRockers 1.0
conclusions:
a waste of time....
OK. Thanx for this information. Because at the moment no functional patches of Stockfish are released, I have some free CPU-time. So it is no problem to play some thousand games with ChessRockers. Each new engine release should get one chance. I am a curious tester, too.
And 2000-3000 games will prove, if ChessRockers ist junk or a real progress.
Regards - Stefan
i play today against chessrockers 1.1 and was draw ...so..some peoples are using in play chess.. the man name is EMADMAFIA.... It will be a co FORUM...?
@Alexa1978 wrote:@pohl4711 wrote:Its obviously a Stockfish-derivative. But the testresults posted here are incredible (more than 63% against Komodo 9.2...) and suggest, that ChessRockers 1.0 is measureable stronger than the latest Stockfish-Dev.
I doubt that. But I will give ChessRockers 1.0 (64bit, Popcount) a try and play some thousand games with my SPCC test-conditions (http://spcc.beepworld.de ).
Then we will have a independent and valid result of ChessRockers 1.0. (Test of ChessRockers 1.1 will only follow, if ChessRockers 1.0 is really stronger than the latest Stockfish-Dev).
Stay tuned!
analyzing the files of this "garbage" I found the 99.99999% of equality with Stockfish. Out of curiosity I issued a challenge with the same Stockfish than a week old and this is the partial result ....
I75960x
Perfect book 2015t
time 3 '+ 0 "
TB 5 men syzygy
LP on for ChessRockers 1.0
conclusions:
a waste of time....
Use Normal 64
2500 games played with ChessRockers 1.0 (details below). Score 70.5%. Stockfish scored 71.5% in my latest testruns with the same conditions (http://spcc.beepworld.de ). So ChessRockers is a cheap clone of Stockfish, which is not stronger.
So, do not pay money for ChessRockers. It is a (stolen) peace of junk !!!
So, do not pay money for ChessRockers. It is a (stolen) peace of junk !!!
- Code:
Games Completed = 2500 of 7000 (Avg game length = 188.742 sec)
Settings = Gauntlet/128MB/70000ms+700ms/M 450cp for 4 moves, D 110 moves/EPD:C:\LittleBlitzer\SALC_500.epd(500)
Time = 157845 sec elapsed, 284121 sec remaining
1. ChessRockers 1.0 x64s 1762.0/2500 1291-267-942 (L: m=0 t=0 i=0 a=267) (D: r=498 i=128 f=54 s=7 a=255) (tpm=1525.4 d=20.97 nps=1730115)
2. Komodo 9.2 x64 147.5/358 75-138-145 (L: m=0 t=0 i=0 a=138) (D: r=75 i=11 f=14 s=1 a=44) (tpm=1691.3 d=19.58 nps=1572494)
3. Houdini 4 x64 132.0/357 64-157-136 (L: m=0 t=0 i=0 a=157) (D: r=42 i=27 f=8 s=2 a=57) (tpm=1610.0 d=17.44 nps=1948895)
4. Gull 3 x64 97.0/357 21-184-152 (L: m=0 t=0 i=0 a=184) (D: r=82 i=23 f=9 s=1 a=37) (tpm=1732.6 d=16.19 nps=1804675)
5. Critter 1.6a x64 95.0/357 35-202-120 (L: m=0 t=0 i=0 a=202) (D: r=75 i=16 f=6 s=1 a=22) (tpm=1750.9 d=16.83 nps=1955215)
6. Fire 4 x64 90.0/357 22-199-136 (L: m=0 t=0 i=0 a=199) (D: r=75 i=16 f=6 s=1 a=38) (tpm=1771.1 d=15.58 nps=1624885)
7. Mars 3.41 x64 90.5/357 28-204-125 (L: m=0 t=0 i=0 a=204) (D: r=77 i=12 f=4 s=1 a=31) (tpm=1840.9 d=17.26 nps=2047300)
8. Equinox 3.3 x64 86.0/357 22-207-128 (L: m=0 t=0 i=0 a=207) (D: r=72 i=23 f=7 s=0 a=26) (tpm=1799.7 d=18.14 nps=1536957)
@pohl4711 wrote:2500 games played with ChessRockers 1.0 (details below). Score 70.5%. Stockfish scored 71.5% in my latest testruns with the same conditions (http://spcc.beepworld.de ). So ChessRockers is a cheap clone of Stockfish, which is not stronger.
So, do not pay money for ChessRockers. It is a (stolen) peace of junk !!!
Thank you!
Thank you for the advice, not that I was planning to part with any money for it! Cannot see why, or the point of anyone just changing settings on a known engine.
With regard to your testing Stockfish against the other engines, I am a little surprised that Komodo 9.2 should be lower than the 9.1, however I now note that your testing is done
using blitz settings so maybe that has some bearing on the matter.
As someone who needs my engines to help me work on my own games etc. blitz settings are just pointless, as I know how often all the engines can change 'their minds' given more
time to think.
With regard to your testing Stockfish against the other engines, I am a little surprised that Komodo 9.2 should be lower than the 9.1, however I now note that your testing is done
using blitz settings so maybe that has some bearing on the matter.
As someone who needs my engines to help me work on my own games etc. blitz settings are just pointless, as I know how often all the engines can change 'their minds' given more
time to think.
Message [Page 1 of 1]
Related Topics
|
|
|