When PC double speed how do we calculate the Elo Gained?

[lkaufman]

I got my old AMD Athlon 1200 from my basement that was collecting dust and match Shredder 8 vs my Intel i7 3.40 GHz Dragon2 at Knight Odds
I was making both moves going back and forth between the 2 computers and engines, but at one point Shredder 8 with my old AMD Athlon 1200 got too low on time with 45 seconds left that I decided to adjust the game to a draw since Shredder8 was making moves too quickly for me to keep up inputting into Dragon2 or my 2nd PC i7 3.40 GHz. I was using my 4 cores with Contempt = 125 on my i7 for Dradon2. I believe that the rating at the time of the the AMD Athlon 1200 was a little inflated, where Shredder8 in my opinion was no more than 2650.

[pgn][Event "Knight Odds"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2021.09.14"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Dragon-2-64bit-avx2"]
[Black "Shredder8"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[BlackElo "2792"]
[Time "04:33:17"]
[WhiteElo "3590"]
[TimeControl "1800+10"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - 0 1"]
[Termination "adjudication"]
[PlyCount "234"]
[WhiteType "program"]
[BlackType "program"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. g3 d5 5. Bg2 Kf8 6. O-O dxc4 7. Qa4 c5 8.
Qb5 Qa5 9. Qxc4 Nc6 10. a3 Bxc3 11. bxc3 Nd5 12. a4 Kg8 13. Ba3 cxd4 14.
cxd4 Bd7 15. Rfb1 Rc8 16. Qd3 b6 17. e4 Nc3 18. Rc1 Nb4 19. Qd2 Nba2 20.
Rc2 Qxa4 21. Raxa2 Nxa2 22. Rxa2 Qb3 23. h4 a5 24. Kh2 h6 25. Bd6 Qc3 26.
Qf4 Qxd4 27. Be5 Qc5 28. Rd2 Bc6 29. Rd6 Rh7 30. Bh3 b5 31. Bd4 Qc4 32. Qe5
Re8 33. Bg2 h5 34. Be3 f6 35. Qa1 a4 36. Rd4 Qb3 37. Qc1 Ba8 38. Qd2 e5 39.
Rb4 Qf7 40. Rxb5 g5 41. hxg5 h4 42. g4 h3 43. Bf1 fxg5 44. Be2 Bc6 45. Rb6
Bxe4 46. Rb4 Bd5 47. Rxa4 Rg7 48. Ra7 Bb7 49. Qd6 Qd5 50. Qxd5+ Bxd5 51.
Ra5 Bg2 52. Bc4+ Kh7 53. Bd3+ Kg8 54. Kg3 Bb7 55. Kxh3 Kf7 56. Rb5 Bc8 57.
Be4 Rgg8 58. Kg3 Kf6 59. Bc1 Rh8 60. Rb6+ Be6 61. Bf5 Rh1 62. Bxe6 Rxe6 63.
Bxg5+ Kf7 64. Rb4 Kg6 65. Be3 Rg1+ 66. Kh3 Re1 67. Ra4 Kf6 68. Ra3 Rb1 69.
Ra8 Kg6 70. Kg2 Rc6 71. Ra5 Rb4 72. Rxe5 Rxg4+ 73. Kf3 Rcc4 74. Rd5 Kf6 75.
Ra5 Ra4 76. Rh5 Rge4 77. Rb5 Ke6 78. Rc5 Rac4 79. Rg5 Rh4 80. Kg3 Rhe4 81.
Bb6 Re2 82. Be3 Kf6 83. Rb5 Ke6 84. Rb6+ Kd5 85. Rb1 Ra2 86. Rb5+ Ke4 87.
Rb8 Rca4 88. Rb3 Re2 89. f3+ Kf5 90. Rb5+ Ke6 91. Rb8 Kf5 92. Rf8+ Kg6 93.
Bb6 Rc4 94. Bd8 Rec2 95. Rf6+ Kg7 96. Rb6 Rc1 97. Bf6+ Kf7 98. Be5 Re1 99.
Bb8 Rcc1 100. Bd6 Re6 101. Rb7+ Kg6 102. Bb8 Rg1+ 103. Kf2 Ree1 104. Ba7
Kf5 105. Rb5+ Ke6 106. f4 Rb1 107. Ra5 Rbe1 108. Kf3 Rgf1+ 109. Kg4 Re4
110. Ra6+ Kd5 111. Bb8 Rb4 112. Rd6+ Ke4 113. Re6+ Kd3 114. Be5 Rc4 115.
Kf5 Rc8 116. Rf6 Rh1 117. Rd6+ Ke3 1/2-1/2[/pgn]

If this was 15' + 10", being "short of time" shouldn't be an issue, playing the endgame with just increment is quite normal at this tc, but anyway in this game a draw was the proper result. I think Dragon will actually do better giving knight odds limiting the search to about 22 plies, especially if you are playing with ponder on, but even without that. Beyond around that depth it just starts to see the flaw in aggressive continuations and essentially gives up when down a piece or more.

The time Control was "1800+10" or 30'+10" and giving more time to an engine around Shedder 8 strength is very tough and at the moment the only engine that can get a draw is Dragon2, when I purchased Shredder 8 back in 2004 I used to have the same machine as SSDF AMD Athlon 1200 and I never thought that in just 15 years+ any program would give Shredder 8 a Knight Odds, but the point here is that back then the SSDF was over inflating engine by as much as 150 rating points.

Are you saying that the current SSDF list is 150 elo inflated relative to FIDE for engines in the human GM range? If so please state your reasons for this belief, I thought they were roughly correct now.

No, what I meant to say is that back in 2003 and 2004 during the time of AMD Athlon 1200 those ratings given to Shredder 8 and other engines were too high probably not 150 Elo higher but much higher than what should have been.

I don’t think that ssdf has rescaled since then. So do you think that the ratings on the current list for those old engines on the old athlon, in the 2700 to 2800 ballpark, are too high, and if so why do you think so?

[Chessqueen]

I got my old AMD Athlon 1200 from my basement that was collecting dust and match Shredder 8 vs my Intel i7 3.40 GHz Dragon2 at Knight Odds
I was making both moves going back and forth between the 2 computers and engines, but at one point Shredder 8 with my old AMD Athlon 1200 got too low on time with 45 seconds left that I decided to adjust the game to a draw since Shredder8 was making moves too quickly for me to keep up inputting into Dragon2 or my 2nd PC i7 3.40 GHz. I was using my 4 cores with Contempt = 125 on my i7 for Dradon2. I believe that the rating at the time of the the AMD Athlon 1200 was a little inflated, where Shredder8 in my opinion was no more than 2650.

[pgn][Event "Knight Odds"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2021.09.14"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Dragon-2-64bit-avx2"]
[Black "Shredder8"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[BlackElo "2792"]
[Time "04:33:17"]
[WhiteElo "3590"]
[TimeControl "1800+10"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - 0 1"]
[Termination "adjudication"]
[PlyCount "234"]
[WhiteType "program"]
[BlackType "program"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. g3 d5 5. Bg2 Kf8 6. O-O dxc4 7. Qa4 c5 8.
Qb5 Qa5 9. Qxc4 Nc6 10. a3 Bxc3 11. bxc3 Nd5 12. a4 Kg8 13. Ba3 cxd4 14.
cxd4 Bd7 15. Rfb1 Rc8 16. Qd3 b6 17. e4 Nc3 18. Rc1 Nb4 19. Qd2 Nba2 20.
Rc2 Qxa4 21. Raxa2 Nxa2 22. Rxa2 Qb3 23. h4 a5 24. Kh2 h6 25. Bd6 Qc3 26.
Qf4 Qxd4 27. Be5 Qc5 28. Rd2 Bc6 29. Rd6 Rh7 30. Bh3 b5 31. Bd4 Qc4 32. Qe5
Re8 33. Bg2 h5 34. Be3 f6 35. Qa1 a4 36. Rd4 Qb3 37. Qc1 Ba8 38. Qd2 e5 39.
Rb4 Qf7 40. Rxb5 g5 41. hxg5 h4 42. g4 h3 43. Bf1 fxg5 44. Be2 Bc6 45. Rb6
Bxe4 46. Rb4 Bd5 47. Rxa4 Rg7 48. Ra7 Bb7 49. Qd6 Qd5 50. Qxd5+ Bxd5 51.
Ra5 Bg2 52. Bc4+ Kh7 53. Bd3+ Kg8 54. Kg3 Bb7 55. Kxh3 Kf7 56. Rb5 Bc8 57.
Be4 Rgg8 58. Kg3 Kf6 59. Bc1 Rh8 60. Rb6+ Be6 61. Bf5 Rh1 62. Bxe6 Rxe6 63.
Bxg5+ Kf7 64. Rb4 Kg6 65. Be3 Rg1+ 66. Kh3 Re1 67. Ra4 Kf6 68. Ra3 Rb1 69.
Ra8 Kg6 70. Kg2 Rc6 71. Ra5 Rb4 72. Rxe5 Rxg4+ 73. Kf3 Rcc4 74. Rd5 Kf6 75.
Ra5 Ra4 76. Rh5 Rge4 77. Rb5 Ke6 78. Rc5 Rac4 79. Rg5 Rh4 80. Kg3 Rhe4 81.
Bb6 Re2 82. Be3 Kf6 83. Rb5 Ke6 84. Rb6+ Kd5 85. Rb1 Ra2 86. Rb5+ Ke4 87.
Rb8 Rca4 88. Rb3 Re2 89. f3+ Kf5 90. Rb5+ Ke6 91. Rb8 Kf5 92. Rf8+ Kg6 93.
Bb6 Rc4 94. Bd8 Rec2 95. Rf6+ Kg7 96. Rb6 Rc1 97. Bf6+ Kf7 98. Be5 Re1 99.
Bb8 Rcc1 100. Bd6 Re6 101. Rb7+ Kg6 102. Bb8 Rg1+ 103. Kf2 Ree1 104. Ba7
Kf5 105. Rb5+ Ke6 106. f4 Rb1 107. Ra5 Rbe1 108. Kf3 Rgf1+ 109. Kg4 Re4
110. Ra6+ Kd5 111. Bb8 Rb4 112. Rd6+ Ke4 113. Re6+ Kd3 114. Be5 Rc4 115.
Kf5 Rc8 116. Rf6 Rh1 117. Rd6+ Ke3 1/2-1/2[/pgn]

If this was 15' + 10", being "short of time" shouldn't be an issue, playing the endgame with just increment is quite normal at this tc, but anyway in this game a draw was the proper result. I think Dragon will actually do better giving knight odds limiting the search to about 22 plies, especially if you are playing with ponder on, but even without that. Beyond around that depth it just starts to see the flaw in aggressive continuations and essentially gives up when down a piece or more.

The time Control was "1800+10" or 30'+10" and giving more time to an engine around Shedder 8 strength is very tough and at the moment the only engine that can get a draw is Dragon2, when I purchased Shredder 8 back in 2004 I used to have the same machine as SSDF AMD Athlon 1200 and I never thought that in just 15 years+ any program would give Shredder 8 a Knight Odds, but the point here is that back then the SSDF was over inflating engine by as much as 150 rating points.

Are you saying that the current SSDF list is 150 elo inflated relative to FIDE for engines in the human GM range? If so please state your reasons for this belief, I thought they were roughly correct now.

No, what I meant to say is that back in 2003 and 2004 during the time of AMD Athlon 1200 those ratings given to Shredder 8 and other engines were too high probably not 150 Elo higher but much higher than what should have been.

I don’t think that ssdf has rescaled since then. So do you think that the ratings on the current list for those old engines on the old athlon, in the 2700 to 2800 ballpark, are too high, and if so why do you think so?

Based on this old list during the time of the AMD Athlon 1200 Shredder8 is list as 2792 in my point of view it is not even close to 2650 and it much closer to Benjamin forum3/viewtopic.php?t=59497

[lkaufman]

I got my old AMD Athlon 1200 from my basement that was collecting dust and match Shredder 8 vs my Intel i7 3.40 GHz Dragon2 at Knight Odds
I was making both moves going back and forth between the 2 computers and engines, but at one point Shredder 8 with my old AMD Athlon 1200 got too low on time with 45 seconds left that I decided to adjust the game to a draw since Shredder8 was making moves too quickly for me to keep up inputting into Dragon2 or my 2nd PC i7 3.40 GHz. I was using my 4 cores with Contempt = 125 on my i7 for Dradon2. I believe that the rating at the time of the the AMD Athlon 1200 was a little inflated, where Shredder8 in my opinion was no more than 2650.

[pgn][Event "Knight Odds"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2021.09.14"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Dragon-2-64bit-avx2"]
[Black "Shredder8"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[BlackElo "2792"]
[Time "04:33:17"]
[WhiteElo "3590"]
[TimeControl "1800+10"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - 0 1"]
[Termination "adjudication"]
[PlyCount "234"]
[WhiteType "program"]
[BlackType "program"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. g3 d5 5. Bg2 Kf8 6. O-O dxc4 7. Qa4 c5 8.
Qb5 Qa5 9. Qxc4 Nc6 10. a3 Bxc3 11. bxc3 Nd5 12. a4 Kg8 13. Ba3 cxd4 14.
cxd4 Bd7 15. Rfb1 Rc8 16. Qd3 b6 17. e4 Nc3 18. Rc1 Nb4 19. Qd2 Nba2 20.
Rc2 Qxa4 21. Raxa2 Nxa2 22. Rxa2 Qb3 23. h4 a5 24. Kh2 h6 25. Bd6 Qc3 26.
Qf4 Qxd4 27. Be5 Qc5 28. Rd2 Bc6 29. Rd6 Rh7 30. Bh3 b5 31. Bd4 Qc4 32. Qe5
Re8 33. Bg2 h5 34. Be3 f6 35. Qa1 a4 36. Rd4 Qb3 37. Qc1 Ba8 38. Qd2 e5 39.
Rb4 Qf7 40. Rxb5 g5 41. hxg5 h4 42. g4 h3 43. Bf1 fxg5 44. Be2 Bc6 45. Rb6
Bxe4 46. Rb4 Bd5 47. Rxa4 Rg7 48. Ra7 Bb7 49. Qd6 Qd5 50. Qxd5+ Bxd5 51.
Ra5 Bg2 52. Bc4+ Kh7 53. Bd3+ Kg8 54. Kg3 Bb7 55. Kxh3 Kf7 56. Rb5 Bc8 57.
Be4 Rgg8 58. Kg3 Kf6 59. Bc1 Rh8 60. Rb6+ Be6 61. Bf5 Rh1 62. Bxe6 Rxe6 63.
Bxg5+ Kf7 64. Rb4 Kg6 65. Be3 Rg1+ 66. Kh3 Re1 67. Ra4 Kf6 68. Ra3 Rb1 69.
Ra8 Kg6 70. Kg2 Rc6 71. Ra5 Rb4 72. Rxe5 Rxg4+ 73. Kf3 Rcc4 74. Rd5 Kf6 75.
Ra5 Ra4 76. Rh5 Rge4 77. Rb5 Ke6 78. Rc5 Rac4 79. Rg5 Rh4 80. Kg3 Rhe4 81.
Bb6 Re2 82. Be3 Kf6 83. Rb5 Ke6 84. Rb6+ Kd5 85. Rb1 Ra2 86. Rb5+ Ke4 87.
Rb8 Rca4 88. Rb3 Re2 89. f3+ Kf5 90. Rb5+ Ke6 91. Rb8 Kf5 92. Rf8+ Kg6 93.
Bb6 Rc4 94. Bd8 Rec2 95. Rf6+ Kg7 96. Rb6 Rc1 97. Bf6+ Kf7 98. Be5 Re1 99.
Bb8 Rcc1 100. Bd6 Re6 101. Rb7+ Kg6 102. Bb8 Rg1+ 103. Kf2 Ree1 104. Ba7
Kf5 105. Rb5+ Ke6 106. f4 Rb1 107. Ra5 Rbe1 108. Kf3 Rgf1+ 109. Kg4 Re4
110. Ra6+ Kd5 111. Bb8 Rb4 112. Rd6+ Ke4 113. Re6+ Kd3 114. Be5 Rc4 115.
Kf5 Rc8 116. Rf6 Rh1 117. Rd6+ Ke3 1/2-1/2[/pgn]

If this was 15' + 10", being "short of time" shouldn't be an issue, playing the endgame with just increment is quite normal at this tc, but anyway in this game a draw was the proper result. I think Dragon will actually do better giving knight odds limiting the search to about 22 plies, especially if you are playing with ponder on, but even without that. Beyond around that depth it just starts to see the flaw in aggressive continuations and essentially gives up when down a piece or more.

The time Control was "1800+10" or 30'+10" and giving more time to an engine around Shedder 8 strength is very tough and at the moment the only engine that can get a draw is Dragon2, when I purchased Shredder 8 back in 2004 I used to have the same machine as SSDF AMD Athlon 1200 and I never thought that in just 15 years+ any program would give Shredder 8 a Knight Odds, but the point here is that back then the SSDF was over inflating engine by as much as 150 rating points.

Are you saying that the current SSDF list is 150 elo inflated relative to FIDE for engines in the human GM range? If so please state your reasons for this belief, I thought they were roughly correct now.

No, what I meant to say is that back in 2003 and 2004 during the time of AMD Athlon 1200 those ratings given to Shredder 8 and other engines were too high probably not 150 Elo higher but much higher than what should have been.

I don’t think that ssdf has rescaled since then. So do you think that the ratings on the current list for those old engines on the old athlon, in the 2700 to 2800 ballpark, are too high, and if so why do you think so?

Based on this old list during the time of the AMD Athlon 1200 Shredder8 is list as 2792 in my point of view it is not even close to 2650 and it much closer to Benjamin forum3/viewtopic.php?t=59497

Shredder 8 on the old Athlon 1200 is CURRENTLY rated 2801 on the SSDF list. So I'm asking why you think that is way too high relative to human FIDE ratings. You mention "Benjamin", but unless you are talking about Joel Benjamin or Benjamin Bok, "Benjamin" is not a human with a FIDE rating, we are not talking about comparing with CCRL, just with FIDE. Only games between engines and humans are relevant to this question.

[Chessqueen]

I got my old AMD Athlon 1200 from my basement that was collecting dust and match Shredder 8 vs my Intel i7 3.40 GHz Dragon2 at Knight Odds
I was making both moves going back and forth between the 2 computers and engines, but at one point Shredder 8 with my old AMD Athlon 1200 got too low on time with 45 seconds left that I decided to adjust the game to a draw since Shredder8 was making moves too quickly for me to keep up inputting into Dragon2 or my 2nd PC i7 3.40 GHz. I was using my 4 cores with Contempt = 125 on my i7 for Dradon2. I believe that the rating at the time of the the AMD Athlon 1200 was a little inflated, where Shredder8 in my opinion was no more than 2650.

[pgn][Event "Knight Odds"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2021.09.14"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Dragon-2-64bit-avx2"]
[Black "Shredder8"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[BlackElo "2792"]
[Time "04:33:17"]
[WhiteElo "3590"]
[TimeControl "1800+10"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - 0 1"]
[Termination "adjudication"]
[PlyCount "234"]
[WhiteType "program"]
[BlackType "program"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. g3 d5 5. Bg2 Kf8 6. O-O dxc4 7. Qa4 c5 8.
Qb5 Qa5 9. Qxc4 Nc6 10. a3 Bxc3 11. bxc3 Nd5 12. a4 Kg8 13. Ba3 cxd4 14.
cxd4 Bd7 15. Rfb1 Rc8 16. Qd3 b6 17. e4 Nc3 18. Rc1 Nb4 19. Qd2 Nba2 20.
Rc2 Qxa4 21. Raxa2 Nxa2 22. Rxa2 Qb3 23. h4 a5 24. Kh2 h6 25. Bd6 Qc3 26.
Qf4 Qxd4 27. Be5 Qc5 28. Rd2 Bc6 29. Rd6 Rh7 30. Bh3 b5 31. Bd4 Qc4 32. Qe5
Re8 33. Bg2 h5 34. Be3 f6 35. Qa1 a4 36. Rd4 Qb3 37. Qc1 Ba8 38. Qd2 e5 39.
Rb4 Qf7 40. Rxb5 g5 41. hxg5 h4 42. g4 h3 43. Bf1 fxg5 44. Be2 Bc6 45. Rb6
Bxe4 46. Rb4 Bd5 47. Rxa4 Rg7 48. Ra7 Bb7 49. Qd6 Qd5 50. Qxd5+ Bxd5 51.
Ra5 Bg2 52. Bc4+ Kh7 53. Bd3+ Kg8 54. Kg3 Bb7 55. Kxh3 Kf7 56. Rb5 Bc8 57.
Be4 Rgg8 58. Kg3 Kf6 59. Bc1 Rh8 60. Rb6+ Be6 61. Bf5 Rh1 62. Bxe6 Rxe6 63.
Bxg5+ Kf7 64. Rb4 Kg6 65. Be3 Rg1+ 66. Kh3 Re1 67. Ra4 Kf6 68. Ra3 Rb1 69.
Ra8 Kg6 70. Kg2 Rc6 71. Ra5 Rb4 72. Rxe5 Rxg4+ 73. Kf3 Rcc4 74. Rd5 Kf6 75.
Ra5 Ra4 76. Rh5 Rge4 77. Rb5 Ke6 78. Rc5 Rac4 79. Rg5 Rh4 80. Kg3 Rhe4 81.
Bb6 Re2 82. Be3 Kf6 83. Rb5 Ke6 84. Rb6+ Kd5 85. Rb1 Ra2 86. Rb5+ Ke4 87.
Rb8 Rca4 88. Rb3 Re2 89. f3+ Kf5 90. Rb5+ Ke6 91. Rb8 Kf5 92. Rf8+ Kg6 93.
Bb6 Rc4 94. Bd8 Rec2 95. Rf6+ Kg7 96. Rb6 Rc1 97. Bf6+ Kf7 98. Be5 Re1 99.
Bb8 Rcc1 100. Bd6 Re6 101. Rb7+ Kg6 102. Bb8 Rg1+ 103. Kf2 Ree1 104. Ba7
Kf5 105. Rb5+ Ke6 106. f4 Rb1 107. Ra5 Rbe1 108. Kf3 Rgf1+ 109. Kg4 Re4
110. Ra6+ Kd5 111. Bb8 Rb4 112. Rd6+ Ke4 113. Re6+ Kd3 114. Be5 Rc4 115.
Kf5 Rc8 116. Rf6 Rh1 117. Rd6+ Ke3 1/2-1/2[/pgn]

If this was 15' + 10", being "short of time" shouldn't be an issue, playing the endgame with just increment is quite normal at this tc, but anyway in this game a draw was the proper result. I think Dragon will actually do better giving knight odds limiting the search to about 22 plies, especially if you are playing with ponder on, but even without that. Beyond around that depth it just starts to see the flaw in aggressive continuations and essentially gives up when down a piece or more.

The time Control was "1800+10" or 30'+10" and giving more time to an engine around Shedder 8 strength is very tough and at the moment the only engine that can get a draw is Dragon2, when I purchased Shredder 8 back in 2004 I used to have the same machine as SSDF AMD Athlon 1200 and I never thought that in just 15 years+ any program would give Shredder 8 a Knight Odds, but the point here is that back then the SSDF was over inflating engine by as much as 150 rating points.

Are you saying that the current SSDF list is 150 elo inflated relative to FIDE for engines in the human GM range? If so please state your reasons for this belief, I thought they were roughly correct now.

No, what I meant to say is that back in 2003 and 2004 during the time of AMD Athlon 1200 those ratings given to Shredder 8 and other engines were too high probably not 150 Elo higher but much higher than what should have been.

I don’t think that ssdf has rescaled since then. So do you think that the ratings on the current list for those old engines on the old athlon, in the 2700 to 2800 ballpark, are too high, and if so why do you think so?

Based on this old list during the time of the AMD Athlon 1200 Shredder8 is list as 2792 in my point of view it is not even close to 2650 and it much closer to Benjamin forum3/viewtopic.php?t=59497

Shredder 8 on the old Athlon 1200 is CURRENTLY rated 2801 on the SSDF list. So I'm asking why you think that is way too high relative to human FIDE ratings. You mention "Benjamin", but unless you are talking about Joel Benjamin or Benjamin Bok, "Benjamin" is not a human with a FIDE rating, we are not talking about comparing with CCRL, just with FIDE. Only games between engines and humans are relevant to this question.

Great 2818 using the Old Athlon 1200 and with a multi Shredder 8 MP 2GB Q6600 2.4 GHz 2907 30 -31 521 39% 2984
I just had a tournament match against Benjamin which is Pro Deo uci and they ended with even score after 20 games at TC 15'+10"
https://demetrix.pagesperso-orange.fr/C ... 4%2022.htm

[lkaufman]

I got my old AMD Athlon 1200 from my basement that was collecting dust and match Shredder 8 vs my Intel i7 3.40 GHz Dragon2 at Knight Odds
I was making both moves going back and forth between the 2 computers and engines, but at one point Shredder 8 with my old AMD Athlon 1200 got too low on time with 45 seconds left that I decided to adjust the game to a draw since Shredder8 was making moves too quickly for me to keep up inputting into Dragon2 or my 2nd PC i7 3.40 GHz. I was using my 4 cores with Contempt = 125 on my i7 for Dradon2. I believe that the rating at the time of the the AMD Athlon 1200 was a little inflated, where Shredder8 in my opinion was no more than 2650.

[pgn][Event "Knight Odds"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2021.09.14"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Dragon-2-64bit-avx2"]
[Black "Shredder8"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[BlackElo "2792"]
[Time "04:33:17"]
[WhiteElo "3590"]
[TimeControl "1800+10"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - 0 1"]
[Termination "adjudication"]
[PlyCount "234"]
[WhiteType "program"]
[BlackType "program"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. g3 d5 5. Bg2 Kf8 6. O-O dxc4 7. Qa4 c5 8.
Qb5 Qa5 9. Qxc4 Nc6 10. a3 Bxc3 11. bxc3 Nd5 12. a4 Kg8 13. Ba3 cxd4 14.
cxd4 Bd7 15. Rfb1 Rc8 16. Qd3 b6 17. e4 Nc3 18. Rc1 Nb4 19. Qd2 Nba2 20.
Rc2 Qxa4 21. Raxa2 Nxa2 22. Rxa2 Qb3 23. h4 a5 24. Kh2 h6 25. Bd6 Qc3 26.
Qf4 Qxd4 27. Be5 Qc5 28. Rd2 Bc6 29. Rd6 Rh7 30. Bh3 b5 31. Bd4 Qc4 32. Qe5
Re8 33. Bg2 h5 34. Be3 f6 35. Qa1 a4 36. Rd4 Qb3 37. Qc1 Ba8 38. Qd2 e5 39.
Rb4 Qf7 40. Rxb5 g5 41. hxg5 h4 42. g4 h3 43. Bf1 fxg5 44. Be2 Bc6 45. Rb6
Bxe4 46. Rb4 Bd5 47. Rxa4 Rg7 48. Ra7 Bb7 49. Qd6 Qd5 50. Qxd5+ Bxd5 51.
Ra5 Bg2 52. Bc4+ Kh7 53. Bd3+ Kg8 54. Kg3 Bb7 55. Kxh3 Kf7 56. Rb5 Bc8 57.
Be4 Rgg8 58. Kg3 Kf6 59. Bc1 Rh8 60. Rb6+ Be6 61. Bf5 Rh1 62. Bxe6 Rxe6 63.
Bxg5+ Kf7 64. Rb4 Kg6 65. Be3 Rg1+ 66. Kh3 Re1 67. Ra4 Kf6 68. Ra3 Rb1 69.
Ra8 Kg6 70. Kg2 Rc6 71. Ra5 Rb4 72. Rxe5 Rxg4+ 73. Kf3 Rcc4 74. Rd5 Kf6 75.
Ra5 Ra4 76. Rh5 Rge4 77. Rb5 Ke6 78. Rc5 Rac4 79. Rg5 Rh4 80. Kg3 Rhe4 81.
Bb6 Re2 82. Be3 Kf6 83. Rb5 Ke6 84. Rb6+ Kd5 85. Rb1 Ra2 86. Rb5+ Ke4 87.
Rb8 Rca4 88. Rb3 Re2 89. f3+ Kf5 90. Rb5+ Ke6 91. Rb8 Kf5 92. Rf8+ Kg6 93.
Bb6 Rc4 94. Bd8 Rec2 95. Rf6+ Kg7 96. Rb6 Rc1 97. Bf6+ Kf7 98. Be5 Re1 99.
Bb8 Rcc1 100. Bd6 Re6 101. Rb7+ Kg6 102. Bb8 Rg1+ 103. Kf2 Ree1 104. Ba7
Kf5 105. Rb5+ Ke6 106. f4 Rb1 107. Ra5 Rbe1 108. Kf3 Rgf1+ 109. Kg4 Re4
110. Ra6+ Kd5 111. Bb8 Rb4 112. Rd6+ Ke4 113. Re6+ Kd3 114. Be5 Rc4 115.
Kf5 Rc8 116. Rf6 Rh1 117. Rd6+ Ke3 1/2-1/2[/pgn]

If this was 15' + 10", being "short of time" shouldn't be an issue, playing the endgame with just increment is quite normal at this tc, but anyway in this game a draw was the proper result. I think Dragon will actually do better giving knight odds limiting the search to about 22 plies, especially if you are playing with ponder on, but even without that. Beyond around that depth it just starts to see the flaw in aggressive continuations and essentially gives up when down a piece or more.

The time Control was "1800+10" or 30'+10" and giving more time to an engine around Shedder 8 strength is very tough and at the moment the only engine that can get a draw is Dragon2, when I purchased Shredder 8 back in 2004 I used to have the same machine as SSDF AMD Athlon 1200 and I never thought that in just 15 years+ any program would give Shredder 8 a Knight Odds, but the point here is that back then the SSDF was over inflating engine by as much as 150 rating points.

Are you saying that the current SSDF list is 150 elo inflated relative to FIDE for engines in the human GM range? If so please state your reasons for this belief, I thought they were roughly correct now.

No, what I meant to say is that back in 2003 and 2004 during the time of AMD Athlon 1200 those ratings given to Shredder 8 and other engines were too high probably not 150 Elo higher but much higher than what should have been.

I don’t think that ssdf has rescaled since then. So do you think that the ratings on the current list for those old engines on the old athlon, in the 2700 to 2800 ballpark, are too high, and if so why do you think so?

Based on this old list during the time of the AMD Athlon 1200 Shredder8 is list as 2792 in my point of view it is not even close to 2650 and it much closer to Benjamin forum3/viewtopic.php?t=59497

Shredder 8 on the old Athlon 1200 is CURRENTLY rated 2801 on the SSDF list. So I'm asking why you think that is way too high relative to human FIDE ratings. You mention "Benjamin", but unless you are talking about Joel Benjamin or Benjamin Bok, "Benjamin" is not a human with a FIDE rating, we are not talking about comparing with CCRL, just with FIDE. Only games between engines and humans are relevant to this question.

Great 2818 using the Old Athlon 1200 and with a multi Shredder 8 MP 2GB Q6600 2.4 GHz 2907 30 -31 521 39% 2984
I just had a tournament match against Benjamin which is Pro Deo uci and they ended with even score after 20 games at TC 15'+10"
https://demetrix.pagesperso-orange.fr/C ... 4%2022.htm

I just completed a review of all of the high level standard time control man vs. machine matches from 2002 to 2006, comparing the performance ratings achieved with the SSDF ratings, making adjustments based on available information for the hardware. I don't have full hardware info and I am not an expert on the hardware of the period, but I adjusted for processor speed and number of threads based on my findings that the gap between the Athlon 1200 and the q6600 (4 threads at 2.4 Ghz) averaged 112 elo; the hardware used in these events was in between those two so I'm not likely to be way off in my estimates. On average for all six events, SSDF ratings were 22 elo too high; for just the last three (comprising 22 games against several different top GMs from 2004 thru 2006) they were 64 elo too high. Probably the GMs got more familiar with playing against computers, and given that this trend probably continued I think it's best to use the 64 elo figure. I'm not sure where you saw the 2907 figure you mention for Shredder on the q6600, but it is close to the 2801 + 112 figure I would estimate so I'll assume it was on some SSDF list. If we use my 64 elo adjustment, then the estimated rating for Shredder 8 against humans at classical time controls would be 2907 - 64 = 2843 FIDE on the Q6600, or 2801 - 64 = 2737 on the old Athlon 1200. So I was somewhat overestimating engine ratings; probably we don't need to add quite as much to CCRL ratings as I thought.
Please clarify how you ran this match with Benjamin. Benjamin is single core; was Shredder 8 also running on just one core? What hardware were they each running on?

[Chessqueen]

I got my old AMD Athlon 1200 from my basement that was collecting dust and match Shredder 8 vs my Intel i7 3.40 GHz Dragon2 at Knight Odds
I was making both moves going back and forth between the 2 computers and engines, but at one point Shredder 8 with my old AMD Athlon 1200 got too low on time with 45 seconds left that I decided to adjust the game to a draw since Shredder8 was making moves too quickly for me to keep up inputting into Dragon2 or my 2nd PC i7 3.40 GHz. I was using my 4 cores with Contempt = 125 on my i7 for Dradon2. I believe that the rating at the time of the the AMD Athlon 1200 was a little inflated, where Shredder8 in my opinion was no more than 2650.

[pgn][Event "Knight Odds"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2021.09.14"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Dragon-2-64bit-avx2"]
[Black "Shredder8"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[BlackElo "2792"]
[Time "04:33:17"]
[WhiteElo "3590"]
[TimeControl "1800+10"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - 0 1"]
[Termination "adjudication"]
[PlyCount "234"]
[WhiteType "program"]
[BlackType "program"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. g3 d5 5. Bg2 Kf8 6. O-O dxc4 7. Qa4 c5 8.
Qb5 Qa5 9. Qxc4 Nc6 10. a3 Bxc3 11. bxc3 Nd5 12. a4 Kg8 13. Ba3 cxd4 14.
cxd4 Bd7 15. Rfb1 Rc8 16. Qd3 b6 17. e4 Nc3 18. Rc1 Nb4 19. Qd2 Nba2 20.
Rc2 Qxa4 21. Raxa2 Nxa2 22. Rxa2 Qb3 23. h4 a5 24. Kh2 h6 25. Bd6 Qc3 26.
Qf4 Qxd4 27. Be5 Qc5 28. Rd2 Bc6 29. Rd6 Rh7 30. Bh3 b5 31. Bd4 Qc4 32. Qe5
Re8 33. Bg2 h5 34. Be3 f6 35. Qa1 a4 36. Rd4 Qb3 37. Qc1 Ba8 38. Qd2 e5 39.
Rb4 Qf7 40. Rxb5 g5 41. hxg5 h4 42. g4 h3 43. Bf1 fxg5 44. Be2 Bc6 45. Rb6
Bxe4 46. Rb4 Bd5 47. Rxa4 Rg7 48. Ra7 Bb7 49. Qd6 Qd5 50. Qxd5+ Bxd5 51.
Ra5 Bg2 52. Bc4+ Kh7 53. Bd3+ Kg8 54. Kg3 Bb7 55. Kxh3 Kf7 56. Rb5 Bc8 57.
Be4 Rgg8 58. Kg3 Kf6 59. Bc1 Rh8 60. Rb6+ Be6 61. Bf5 Rh1 62. Bxe6 Rxe6 63.
Bxg5+ Kf7 64. Rb4 Kg6 65. Be3 Rg1+ 66. Kh3 Re1 67. Ra4 Kf6 68. Ra3 Rb1 69.
Ra8 Kg6 70. Kg2 Rc6 71. Ra5 Rb4 72. Rxe5 Rxg4+ 73. Kf3 Rcc4 74. Rd5 Kf6 75.
Ra5 Ra4 76. Rh5 Rge4 77. Rb5 Ke6 78. Rc5 Rac4 79. Rg5 Rh4 80. Kg3 Rhe4 81.
Bb6 Re2 82. Be3 Kf6 83. Rb5 Ke6 84. Rb6+ Kd5 85. Rb1 Ra2 86. Rb5+ Ke4 87.
Rb8 Rca4 88. Rb3 Re2 89. f3+ Kf5 90. Rb5+ Ke6 91. Rb8 Kf5 92. Rf8+ Kg6 93.
Bb6 Rc4 94. Bd8 Rec2 95. Rf6+ Kg7 96. Rb6 Rc1 97. Bf6+ Kf7 98. Be5 Re1 99.
Bb8 Rcc1 100. Bd6 Re6 101. Rb7+ Kg6 102. Bb8 Rg1+ 103. Kf2 Ree1 104. Ba7
Kf5 105. Rb5+ Ke6 106. f4 Rb1 107. Ra5 Rbe1 108. Kf3 Rgf1+ 109. Kg4 Re4
110. Ra6+ Kd5 111. Bb8 Rb4 112. Rd6+ Ke4 113. Re6+ Kd3 114. Be5 Rc4 115.
Kf5 Rc8 116. Rf6 Rh1 117. Rd6+ Ke3 1/2-1/2[/pgn]

If this was 15' + 10", being "short of time" shouldn't be an issue, playing the endgame with just increment is quite normal at this tc, but anyway in this game a draw was the proper result. I think Dragon will actually do better giving knight odds limiting the search to about 22 plies, especially if you are playing with ponder on, but even without that. Beyond around that depth it just starts to see the flaw in aggressive continuations and essentially gives up when down a piece or more.

The time Control was "1800+10" or 30'+10" and giving more time to an engine around Shedder 8 strength is very tough and at the moment the only engine that can get a draw is Dragon2, when I purchased Shredder 8 back in 2004 I used to have the same machine as SSDF AMD Athlon 1200 and I never thought that in just 15 years+ any program would give Shredder 8 a Knight Odds, but the point here is that back then the SSDF was over inflating engine by as much as 150 rating points.

Are you saying that the current SSDF list is 150 elo inflated relative to FIDE for engines in the human GM range? If so please state your reasons for this belief, I thought they were roughly correct now.

No, what I meant to say is that back in 2003 and 2004 during the time of AMD Athlon 1200 those ratings given to Shredder 8 and other engines were too high probably not 150 Elo higher but much higher than what should have been.

I don’t think that ssdf has rescaled since then. So do you think that the ratings on the current list for those old engines on the old athlon, in the 2700 to 2800 ballpark, are too high, and if so why do you think so?

Based on this old list during the time of the AMD Athlon 1200 Shredder8 is list as 2792 in my point of view it is not even close to 2650 and it much closer to Benjamin forum3/viewtopic.php?t=59497

Shredder 8 on the old Athlon 1200 is CURRENTLY rated 2801 on the SSDF list. So I'm asking why you think that is way too high relative to human FIDE ratings. You mention "Benjamin", but unless you are talking about Joel Benjamin or Benjamin Bok, "Benjamin" is not a human with a FIDE rating, we are not talking about comparing with CCRL, just with FIDE. Only games between engines and humans are relevant to this question.

Great 2818 using the Old Athlon 1200 and with a multi Shredder 8 MP 2GB Q6600 2.4 GHz 2907 30 -31 521 39% 2984
I just had a tournament match against Benjamin which is Pro Deo uci and they ended with even score after 20 games at TC 15'+10"
https://demetrix.pagesperso-orange.fr/C ... 4%2022.htm

I just completed a review of all of the high level standard time control man vs. machine matches from 2002 to 2006, comparing the performance ratings achieved with the SSDF ratings, making adjustments based on available information for the hardware. I don't have full hardware info and I am not an expert on the hardware of the period, but I adjusted for processor speed and number of threads based on my findings that the gap between the Athlon 1200 and the q6600 (4 threads at 2.4 Ghz) averaged 112 elo; the hardware used in these events was in between those two so I'm not likely to be way off in my estimates. On average for all six events, SSDF ratings were 22 elo too high; for just the last three (comprising 22 games against several different top GMs from 2004 thru 2006) they were 64 elo too high. Probably the GMs got more familiar with playing against computers, and given that this trend probably continued I think it's best to use the 64 elo figure. I'm not sure where you saw the 2907 figure you mention for Shredder on the q6600, but it is close to the 2801 + 112 figure I would estimate so I'll assume it was on some SSDF list. If we use my 64 elo adjustment, then the estimated rating for Shredder 8 against humans at classical time controls would be 2907 - 64 = 2843 FIDE on the Q6600, or 2801 - 64 = 2737 on the old Athlon 1200. So I was somewhat overestimating engine ratings; probably we don't need to add quite as much to CCRL ratings as I thought.
Please clarify how you ran this match with Benjamin. Benjamin is single core; was Shredder 8 also running on just one core? What hardware were they each running on?

I saw it here https://www.chessusa.com/SSDF-LIST.html , but I just finished a match of 40 games at TC 10'+5" between Shield vs Shredder8 both using 1 core and the final score was 22 to 18 in favor of Shield 107 Shield 2.1 64-bit 4CPU 2842 +24 −24 48.7% +9.2 36.0% 594

[lkaufman]

I got my old AMD Athlon 1200 from my basement that was collecting dust and match Shredder 8 vs my Intel i7 3.40 GHz Dragon2 at Knight Odds
I was making both moves going back and forth between the 2 computers and engines, but at one point Shredder 8 with my old AMD Athlon 1200 got too low on time with 45 seconds left that I decided to adjust the game to a draw since Shredder8 was making moves too quickly for me to keep up inputting into Dragon2 or my 2nd PC i7 3.40 GHz. I was using my 4 cores with Contempt = 125 on my i7 for Dradon2. I believe that the rating at the time of the the AMD Athlon 1200 was a little inflated, where Shredder8 in my opinion was no more than 2650.

[pgn][Event "Knight Odds"]
[Site "?"]
[Date "2021.09.14"]
[Round "?"]
[White "Dragon-2-64bit-avx2"]
[Black "Shredder8"]
[Result "1/2-1/2"]
[BlackElo "2792"]
[Time "04:33:17"]
[WhiteElo "3590"]
[TimeControl "1800+10"]
[SetUp "1"]
[FEN "rnbqkbnr/pppppppp/8/8/8/8/PPPPPPPP/RNBQKB1R w KQkq - 0 1"]
[Termination "adjudication"]
[PlyCount "234"]
[WhiteType "program"]
[BlackType "program"]

1. d4 Nf6 2. c4 e6 3. Nc3 Bb4 4. g3 d5 5. Bg2 Kf8 6. O-O dxc4 7. Qa4 c5 8.
Qb5 Qa5 9. Qxc4 Nc6 10. a3 Bxc3 11. bxc3 Nd5 12. a4 Kg8 13. Ba3 cxd4 14.
cxd4 Bd7 15. Rfb1 Rc8 16. Qd3 b6 17. e4 Nc3 18. Rc1 Nb4 19. Qd2 Nba2 20.
Rc2 Qxa4 21. Raxa2 Nxa2 22. Rxa2 Qb3 23. h4 a5 24. Kh2 h6 25. Bd6 Qc3 26.
Qf4 Qxd4 27. Be5 Qc5 28. Rd2 Bc6 29. Rd6 Rh7 30. Bh3 b5 31. Bd4 Qc4 32. Qe5
Re8 33. Bg2 h5 34. Be3 f6 35. Qa1 a4 36. Rd4 Qb3 37. Qc1 Ba8 38. Qd2 e5 39.
Rb4 Qf7 40. Rxb5 g5 41. hxg5 h4 42. g4 h3 43. Bf1 fxg5 44. Be2 Bc6 45. Rb6
Bxe4 46. Rb4 Bd5 47. Rxa4 Rg7 48. Ra7 Bb7 49. Qd6 Qd5 50. Qxd5+ Bxd5 51.
Ra5 Bg2 52. Bc4+ Kh7 53. Bd3+ Kg8 54. Kg3 Bb7 55. Kxh3 Kf7 56. Rb5 Bc8 57.
Be4 Rgg8 58. Kg3 Kf6 59. Bc1 Rh8 60. Rb6+ Be6 61. Bf5 Rh1 62. Bxe6 Rxe6 63.
Bxg5+ Kf7 64. Rb4 Kg6 65. Be3 Rg1+ 66. Kh3 Re1 67. Ra4 Kf6 68. Ra3 Rb1 69.
Ra8 Kg6 70. Kg2 Rc6 71. Ra5 Rb4 72. Rxe5 Rxg4+ 73. Kf3 Rcc4 74. Rd5 Kf6 75.
Ra5 Ra4 76. Rh5 Rge4 77. Rb5 Ke6 78. Rc5 Rac4 79. Rg5 Rh4 80. Kg3 Rhe4 81.
Bb6 Re2 82. Be3 Kf6 83. Rb5 Ke6 84. Rb6+ Kd5 85. Rb1 Ra2 86. Rb5+ Ke4 87.
Rb8 Rca4 88. Rb3 Re2 89. f3+ Kf5 90. Rb5+ Ke6 91. Rb8 Kf5 92. Rf8+ Kg6 93.
Bb6 Rc4 94. Bd8 Rec2 95. Rf6+ Kg7 96. Rb6 Rc1 97. Bf6+ Kf7 98. Be5 Re1 99.
Bb8 Rcc1 100. Bd6 Re6 101. Rb7+ Kg6 102. Bb8 Rg1+ 103. Kf2 Ree1 104. Ba7
Kf5 105. Rb5+ Ke6 106. f4 Rb1 107. Ra5 Rbe1 108. Kf3 Rgf1+ 109. Kg4 Re4
110. Ra6+ Kd5 111. Bb8 Rb4 112. Rd6+ Ke4 113. Re6+ Kd3 114. Be5 Rc4 115.
Kf5 Rc8 116. Rf6 Rh1 117. Rd6+ Ke3 1/2-1/2[/pgn]

If this was 15' + 10", being "short of time" shouldn't be an issue, playing the endgame with just increment is quite normal at this tc, but anyway in this game a draw was the proper result. I think Dragon will actually do better giving knight odds limiting the search to about 22 plies, especially if you are playing with ponder on, but even without that. Beyond around that depth it just starts to see the flaw in aggressive continuations and essentially gives up when down a piece or more.

The time Control was "1800+10" or 30'+10" and giving more time to an engine around Shedder 8 strength is very tough and at the moment the only engine that can get a draw is Dragon2, when I purchased Shredder 8 back in 2004 I used to have the same machine as SSDF AMD Athlon 1200 and I never thought that in just 15 years+ any program would give Shredder 8 a Knight Odds, but the point here is that back then the SSDF was over inflating engine by as much as 150 rating points.

Are you saying that the current SSDF list is 150 elo inflated relative to FIDE for engines in the human GM range? If so please state your reasons for this belief, I thought they were roughly correct now.

No, what I meant to say is that back in 2003 and 2004 during the time of AMD Athlon 1200 those ratings given to Shredder 8 and other engines were too high probably not 150 Elo higher but much higher than what should have been.

I don’t think that ssdf has rescaled since then. So do you think that the ratings on the current list for those old engines on the old athlon, in the 2700 to 2800 ballpark, are too high, and if so why do you think so?

Based on this old list during the time of the AMD Athlon 1200 Shredder8 is list as 2792 in my point of view it is not even close to 2650 and it much closer to Benjamin forum3/viewtopic.php?t=59497

Shredder 8 on the old Athlon 1200 is CURRENTLY rated 2801 on the SSDF list. So I'm asking why you think that is way too high relative to human FIDE ratings. You mention "Benjamin", but unless you are talking about Joel Benjamin or Benjamin Bok, "Benjamin" is not a human with a FIDE rating, we are not talking about comparing with CCRL, just with FIDE. Only games between engines and humans are relevant to this question.

Great 2818 using the Old Athlon 1200 and with a multi Shredder 8 MP 2GB Q6600 2.4 GHz 2907 30 -31 521 39% 2984
I just had a tournament match against Benjamin which is Pro Deo uci and they ended with even score after 20 games at TC 15'+10"
https://demetrix.pagesperso-orange.fr/C ... 4%2022.htm

I just completed a review of all of the high level standard time control man vs. machine matches from 2002 to 2006, comparing the performance ratings achieved with the SSDF ratings, making adjustments based on available information for the hardware. I don't have full hardware info and I am not an expert on the hardware of the period, but I adjusted for processor speed and number of threads based on my findings that the gap between the Athlon 1200 and the q6600 (4 threads at 2.4 Ghz) averaged 112 elo; the hardware used in these events was in between those two so I'm not likely to be way off in my estimates. On average for all six events, SSDF ratings were 22 elo too high; for just the last three (comprising 22 games against several different top GMs from 2004 thru 2006) they were 64 elo too high. Probably the GMs got more familiar with playing against computers, and given that this trend probably continued I think it's best to use the 64 elo figure. I'm not sure where you saw the 2907 figure you mention for Shredder on the q6600, but it is close to the 2801 + 112 figure I would estimate so I'll assume it was on some SSDF list. If we use my 64 elo adjustment, then the estimated rating for Shredder 8 against humans at classical time controls would be 2907 - 64 = 2843 FIDE on the Q6600, or 2801 - 64 = 2737 on the old Athlon 1200. So I was somewhat overestimating engine ratings; probably we don't need to add quite as much to CCRL ratings as I thought.
Please clarify how you ran this match with Benjamin. Benjamin is single core; was Shredder 8 also running on just one core? What hardware were they each running on?

I saw it here https://www.chessusa.com/SSDF-LIST.html , but I just finished a match of 40 games at TC 10'+5" between Shield vs Shredder8 both using 1 core and the final score was 22 to 18 in favor of Shield 107 Shield 2.1 64-bit 4CPU 2842 +24 −24 48.7% +9.2 36.0% 594

22 to 18 is plus 35 elo. So Shredder8 performed at CCRL 2807 in this match. The 2907 SSDF rating is exactly 100 above this, but the q6600 is significantly slower than the currently used i7, probably by about 25 elo at classical tc, so the SSDF - CCRL gap at this level, on identical hardware, based on this match, would be 125 elo. This suggests that CCRL ratings in this range are about 60 elo too low relative to FIDE ratings at classical TC, so maybe 160 too low at Rapid tc. But the margin of error is huge for forty games.

[Chessqueen]

Well Mephisto Amsterdam and Roma etc were unit that calculated either 1 or 2 plies at the most with dedicated chips either at 12Mhz or 20 Mhz at the most, if you match them against low rated engines like Cicada rated 1536 at the most and plat at fast time control 2'+1" Mephisto will beat it since Cicada will not be able to calculate more than 8 plies at that fast speed, but it does not matter if you give Mephisto more time it will still only calculate up depth 1 on my intel i7 3.40Ghz and once it reaches that which is within 1 to 2 seconds it will keep that move before it releases it. Mephisto might still beat either of this low rated engines at TC 2'+1" .

463‑464 Storm 0.6 1571 +21 −21 38.3% +94.8 15.0% 925 74.3%
465 Damas 9 1559 +25 −25 47.8% +17.6 17.6% 626 76.1%
466 IQ23.003 1547 +21 −21 33.6% +118.2 32.6% 854 72.6%
467 Cicada 0.1 64-bit 1536 +24 −25 44.1% +48.0 19.7% 636


1: Amsterdam-UCI 11.0/20 ···················· 11110=00000=1=11101= 99.00
2: Cicada 9.0/20 00001=11111=0=00010= ···················· 99.00

20 games played / Tournament is finished
Name of the tournament: Fire8
Site/ Country: MININT-UB2PIMJ, United States
Level: Blitz 1/1
Hardware: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4770 CPU @ 3.40GHz with 15.9 GB Memory
Operating system: Windows 10 Enterprise Professional (Build 9200) 64 bit
PGN-File: C:\Program Files (x86)\Arena\Tournaments\IGel.pgn
Website:
E-Mail Address:

[Chessqueen]

I always wondered how to calculate the rating of the old Mephisto ROMS now running on PC. It's a lot more than doubling of speed I would assume comparing a modern day PC to 68000 architecture.

Here is another Chess Match between ROCE rated 1838 by CCRL Vs Mephisto Roma uci playing at 1 second per move, any time control greater than 2 seconds per move will lower the chances of Mephisto Roma, since the original program was meant for a module no greater than 5 MHz which did not calculated more than depth 1

Engine Score Ro Ro S-B
1: Roce39 10.5/20 ···················· =0111111100000000111 99.00
2: Roma32-UCI 9.5/20 =1000000011111111000 ···················· 99.00

20 games played / Tournament is finished
Name of the tournament: Mephisto Roma
Site/ Country: MININT-UB2PIMJ, United States
Level: 1 Second
Hardware: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4770 CPU @ 3.40GHz with 15.9 GB Memory
Operating system: Windows 10 Enterprise Professional (Build 9200) 64 bit
PGN-File: C:\Program Files (x86)\Arena\Tournaments\IGel.pgn
Website:
E-Mail Address:

[lkaufman]

Well Mephisto Amsterdam and Roma etc were unit that calculated either 1 or 2 plies at the most with dedicated chips either at 12Mhz or 20 Mhz at the most, if you match them against low rated engines like Cicada rated 1536 at the most and plat at fast time control 2'+1" Mephisto will beat it since Cicada will not be able to calculate more than 8 plies at that fast speed, but it does not matter if you give Mephisto more time it will still only calculate up depth 1 on my intel i7 3.40Ghz and once it reaches that which is within 1 to 2 seconds it will keep that move before it releases it. Mephisto might still beat either of this low rated engines at TC 2'+1" .

463‑464 Storm 0.6 1571 +21 −21 38.3% +94.8 15.0% 925 74.3%
465 Damas 9 1559 +25 −25 47.8% +17.6 17.6% 626 76.1%
466 IQ23.003 1547 +21 −21 33.6% +118.2 32.6% 854 72.6%
467 Cicada 0.1 64-bit 1536 +24 −25 44.1% +48.0 19.7% 636


1: Amsterdam-UCI 11.0/20 ···················· 11110=00000=1=11101= 99.00
2: Cicada 9.0/20 00001=11111=0=00010= ···················· 99.00

20 games played / Tournament is finished
Name of the tournament: Fire8
Site/ Country: MININT-UB2PIMJ, United States
Level: Blitz 1/1
Hardware: Intel(R) Core(TM) i7-4770 CPU @ 3.40GHz with 15.9 GB Memory
Operating system: Windows 10 Enterprise Professional (Build 9200) 64 bit
PGN-File: C:\Program Files (x86)\Arena\Tournaments\IGel.pgn
Website:
E-Mail Address:

Very interesting. Some questions and points:
1. Where do you get these Mephisto engines to run on PC?
2. If they report depth 1 or 2, that is just full ply depth, it's like saying that if you run Dragon on Stockfish to 10 plies it will only be doing 1 or 2 plies full depth, the rest are pruned to various degrees. Mephisto was also selective, though it worked differently. I think they had about 6 or 7 selective plies.
3. Something is very strange here. Mephisto Amsterdam, running on a 68000 processor initially at perhaps 12 MHz, played at somewhere around USCF 2150 level (supposedly FIDE 2050 level) against humans at classical time controls, although much lower on engine lists. Now it would presumably be running more than a hundred times faster, should be something like 2400 FIDE or so vs. humans. Yet you are getting a 1570 CCRL result! Now I know CCRL ratings are lower than human ones, especially at lower levels, but not like 800 elo! Is there something wrong with the version, or am I misunderstanding something? This seems ridiculous.
4. Have you tried playing any rapid games yourself with this pc version of Mephisto Amsterdam? Even the original dedicated model should be a tough match for you at 1950 FIDE. Perhaps that would give us a clue.