JJJ wrote:In fact, you should even wait for Komodo 9.42 as far I understood.
Well, i have allready 150 games now at same TC 3m2s and same other conditions
In fact, sofar Komodo 9.42 is doing worse
55,3% for Stockfish +33 =100 -17
After 200 games 55,75% for SF 150316 against Komodo 9.42(with contempt=0)
+44 =135 -21, with 67,5% drawpercentage
At same time I have allready 50 games on AMD1090T 4core each at TC15m10s SF020316 against Komodo 9.42(with contempt=0)
52% for SF 020316
+9 =34 -7, with 68% drawpercentage
26 games before with Komodo 9.4 at same PC +5 =17 -4 for SF 020316
I let it run for another 50 games to see the outcome and have a comparison over 100 games between SF020316 vs K9.3 and K9.42
SF020316 against Komodo 9.3 scored 58% at same TC 15m10s 4cores
Outcome for SF 020316 against Komodo 9.42 53% win for SF 020316 with 68% drawpercentage
Meaning a 5% improvement for Komodo 9.42 in a 100 game match over Komodo 9.3 under same match conditions
Two illustrative games showing both strong and weak points for these top engines
Komodo likes pawns on 6th rank but h6 sometimes is a special case which Sf prooves in first game
While in second game SF is not aware of its bad situation where Komodo has a strong pawn on d6
JJJ wrote:In fact, you should even wait for Komodo 9.42 as far I understood.
Well, i have allready 150 games now at same TC 3m2s and same other conditions
In fact, sofar Komodo 9.42 is doing worse
55,3% for Stockfish +33 =100 -17
After 200 games 55,75% for SF 150316 against Komodo 9.42(with contempt=0)
+44 =135 -21, with 67,5% drawpercentage
At same time I have allready 50 games on AMD1090T 4core each at TC15m10s SF020316 against Komodo 9.42(with contempt=0)
52% for SF 020316
+9 =34 -7, with 68% drawpercentage
26 games before with Komodo 9.4 at same PC +5 =17 -4 for SF 020316
I let it run for another 50 games to see the outcome and have a comparison over 100 games between SF020316 vs K9.3 and K9.42
SF020316 against Komodo 9.3 scored 58% at same TC 15m10s 4cores
Certainly for your hardware and CPU Stockfish looks to be better.
Looking over the results all the way, from TC bullet 1core by Paulie D, till Grahams LTC 8core at CCRL40/40 TC, on all different hardware and at any TC Stockfish 7 or latest dev is better than latest Komodo 9.42 within a range of 52% - 56%
See summary beneath of all gathered results, a total of 6700 games between them published on the most common lists and else on cc websites:
CCRL 40/4 53% (100games 1core)
CEGT 40/4 54,7% (200 games 1 core )and 54% (12 cores 50 games)
CEGT 40/20 55%, (SF7 100games 1core)
IPON 55% (SF7 vs 9.4 and 9.42 combined 440 games)
SPCC 54,2% (216games TC 15m3s 4cores)
Own testing on 2 machines AMD1090T 4cores and i5 2cores, 53% and 55,75% (300 games total)
Four matches played so far by Graham Banks in his 8cpu matches at TC 40/40 CCRL:
first match 100 games SF150316 vs K1589 +6 for SF W: 15 L: 9 D: 76 (76%) (http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 22&t=59452)
second match 54 games SF150316 vs K1589 + 5 for SF W: 10 L: 5 D: 39 (78%) (http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 74&t=59521)
third match 104 games SF150316 vs K9.4 equal result 52-52 W: 8 L: 8 D: 88 (84,6%)
fourth match underway and yet after 40 games SF150316 vs K9.42 +5 for SF W: 9 L: 4 D: 29
Giving combined yet after 300 games + 16 for SF is 158 - 142 is 52,7%
Ironically same 52,7% as at bullet TC, 5000 games TC 20s+2ms tested by Paulie D on immortalchess (http://immortalchess.net/forum/showpost ... tcount=442)
Komodo once again tops all the major rating lists (CCRL, CEGT, IPON, and Frank's list) yet falls a bit short in direct matches with SF. Some of this is due to Contempt, which hurts in direct matches with SF, but this doesn't appear to be the full explanation. I think that it is because SF searches slightly deeper than Komodo, which is important in direct matchups, but against other engines it is not so significant, and Komodo does better due to better eval. But that's hard to prove.
lkaufman wrote:Komodo once again tops all the major rating lists (CCRL, CEGT, IPON, and Frank's list) yet falls a bit short in direct matches with SF. Some of this is due to Contempt, which hurts in direct matches with SF, but this doesn't appear to be the full explanation. I think that it is because SF searches slightly deeper than Komodo, which is important in direct matchups, but against other engines it is not so significant, and Komodo does better due to better eval. But that's hard to prove.
Could it be that Stockfish wins because it is just stronger than Komodo?
lkaufman wrote:Komodo once again tops all the major rating lists (CCRL, CEGT, IPON, and Frank's list) yet falls a bit short in direct matches with SF. Some of this is due to Contempt, which hurts in direct matches with SF, but this doesn't appear to be the full explanation. I think that it is because SF searches slightly deeper than Komodo, which is important in direct matchups, but against other engines it is not so significant, and Komodo does better due to better eval. But that's hard to prove.
Could it be that Stockfish wins because it is just stronger than Komodo?
No, because this wouldn't explain why Komodo consistently scores better against other engines to get higher ratings everywhere. Just look at the CEGT 5' + 3" list! In human play, if A has a huge score against B but a consistently lower rating, most would say that B is stronger. Why is it different for engines?
lkaufman wrote:Komodo once again tops all the major rating lists (CCRL, CEGT, IPON, and Frank's list) yet falls a bit short in direct matches with SF. Some of this is due to Contempt, which hurts in direct matches with SF, but this doesn't appear to be the full explanation. I think that it is because SF searches slightly deeper than Komodo, which is important in direct matchups, but against other engines it is not so significant, and Komodo does better due to better eval. But that's hard to prove.
Could it be that Stockfish wins because it is just stronger than Komodo?
No, because this wouldn't explain why Komodo consistently scores better against other engines to get higher ratings everywhere. Just look at the CEGT 5' + 3" list! In human play, if A has a huge score against B but a consistently lower rating, most would say that B is stronger. Why is it different for engines?
A really pathetic answer
In human chess if A wins from B in WC final than A is champion, no matter if it is rated 10 or 20 ELO lower
lkaufman wrote:Komodo once again tops all the major rating lists (CCRL, CEGT, IPON, and Frank's list) yet falls a bit short in direct matches with SF. Some of this is due to Contempt, which hurts in direct matches with SF, but this doesn't appear to be the full explanation. I think that it is because SF searches slightly deeper than Komodo, which is important in direct matchups, but against other engines it is not so significant, and Komodo does better due to better eval. But that's hard to prove.
Could it be that Stockfish wins because it is just stronger than Komodo?
No, because this wouldn't explain why Komodo consistently scores better against other engines to get higher ratings everywhere. Just look at the CEGT 5' + 3" list! In human play, if A has a huge score against B but a consistently lower rating, most would say that B is stronger. Why is it different for engines?
A really pathetic answer
In human chess if A wins from B in WC final than A is champion, no matter if it is rated 10 or 20 ELO lower
Hi Bram,
Larry's answer was a fair explanation.
Komodo does score better against a wider range of opponents than Stockfish does and that explains why it heads most rating lists.
Head to head there's not much between the two engines though and watching their clashes is always interesting.
lkaufman wrote:Komodo once again tops all the major rating lists (CCRL, CEGT, IPON, and Frank's list) yet falls a bit short in direct matches with SF. Some of this is due to Contempt, which hurts in direct matches with SF, but this doesn't appear to be the full explanation. I think that it is because SF searches slightly deeper than Komodo, which is important in direct matchups, but against other engines it is not so significant, and Komodo does better due to better eval. But that's hard to prove.
Could it be that Stockfish wins because it is just stronger than Komodo?
No, because this wouldn't explain why Komodo consistently scores better against other engines to get higher ratings everywhere. Just look at the CEGT 5' + 3" list! In human play, if A has a huge score against B but a consistently lower rating, most would say that B is stronger. Why is it different for engines?
A really pathetic answer
In human chess if A wins from B in WC final than A is champion, no matter if it is rated 10 or 20 ELO lower
Hi Bram,
Larry's answer was a fair explanation.
Komodo does score better against a wider range of opponents than Stockfish does and that explains why it heads most rating lists.
Head to head there's not much between the two engines though and watching their clashes is always interesting.
Graham..
Hi Graham,
There is not much between them is too gently put, 52-56% is substantial
And if you are sportive you admit that and that is what Larry is lacking
I have never observed that from the Stockfish programmers side
and I must say, neither from Mark Leffler
And that is my last word about it
the reality is that Stockfish 7 is around 30-40 Elo weaker as Komodo 9.42. Maybe Stockfish 7 with contemp around 20-30 Elo weaker.
You can't compare two engines only for the ultimative statement .. engine A is stronger as engine B.
To compare Stockfish with Komodo is very tricky. Stockfish is in my opinion a bit better in endgames. Most of the games Stockfish vs. Komodo find the final result in the late endgame. Point B ... in my opinion Komodo equalises with more time the endgame advantage Stockfish have.
The late middlegame from Komodo is more forceful as the late middlegame from Stockfish.
Stockfish plays more the secure way and for that reason Stockfish lost lesser games as Komodo. Komodo won much games more in the late middlegame.
The draw Quote from Stockfish is for 3175 Elo in my list very high. OK the lose quote is fantastic ... very rarely Stockfish lost a game.
After all games I saw ... from both engines more as 10.000 ... the more interesting playing style "from human view" have Komodo. More forceful chess. But of course Stockfish is great too ...
But after all ...
Komodo have a clearly better rating as Stockfish. Only in very fast games Stockfish is a bit better.
All that should be not a secret today! I can not build an other opinion if I am looking in the work by others and my own work in combination.
Best
Frank
Last edited by Frank Quisinsky on Mon Mar 28, 2016 11:39 pm, edited 2 times in total.
