Firebird 1.0 beta vs Rybka 3, 15+10

Discussion of computer chess matches and engine tournaments.

Moderators: hgm, Harvey Williamson, bob

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
NATIONAL12
Posts: 305
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 10:31 pm
Location: bristol,uk

Re: Firebird 1.0 beta vs Rybka 3, 15+10

Post by NATIONAL12 » Mon Jan 18, 2010 11:20 pm

yanquis1972 wrote:i dont see why that indicates anything is wrong. if i am right that 8CPU scaling isn't good for FB then it would be = to somewhat weaker than rybka. it came out to something like +60 elo (a couple more games were run and rybka won one of them) in my tests.

right now i am running FB vs IHv73 @ 4+2 and there are 16 draws in 18 games. this is using a truncated 5 move book. however these two engines are very close to identical imo.
in my match i expected even more draws as most of FB appears to be R3 code(most not all).

beram
Posts: 1187
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 2:11 pm

Re: Firebird 1.0 beta vs Rybka 3, 15+10

Post by beram » Tue Jan 19, 2010 7:18 am

And yet at longer time control an even better performance:

Compaq 6710b, Blitz 25m, Nunn2 Test Match T8300 2100 Mhz, 64 Mb Hash

1 FireBird 1.0 beta w32 +16/=28/-6 60.00% 30.0/50
2 Rybka 3 32-bit +6/=28/-16 40.00% 20.0/50

I am convinced, we have a new leader in these chain of Ip/Rob/Ig/Iv/ namely Firebird with sustained strong play and yet multi pv and other profi futures. Unbelievable how strong this far from perfect engine yet plays, after years of Rybkadomination. Now Vas wil have to improve for 100 ELO otherwise no one buys a Rybka 4. For us who want the strongest possible engine these are sensational times.

greets Bram 8-)

User avatar
Eraserheads
Posts: 226
Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 8:19 am
Location: Quezon City, Philippines
Contact:

Re: Firebird 1.0 beta vs Rybka 3, 15+10

Post by Eraserheads » Wed Jan 20, 2010 7:18 am

Before, Rybka was only fighting against an upstart. Now she has a whole family of upstarts to deal with. Daddy Ippo, sons Ivanhoe and Robbo, and now a pet Firebird.

But Vas never ceased to amaze us with previous Rybkas. I have a feeling R4 will be another revelation that will silence everything. We are in an exciting period of computer chess

Carlos777
Posts: 643
Joined: Sun Dec 13, 2009 5:09 pm

Re: Firebird 1.0 beta vs Rybka 3, 15+10

Post by Carlos777 » Wed Jan 20, 2010 5:00 pm

Eraserheads wrote:We are in an exciting period of computer chess
I agree with this. This puts some pressure on Rybka's creator to improve it. Imagine there were no RL/Igor/Ivan/FB, it would be the same boring tournaments won by R3 by a large margin. Now R3 has competition or is it backwards?

NATIONAL12
Posts: 305
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 10:31 pm
Location: bristol,uk

Re: Firebird 1.0 beta vs Rybka 3, 15+10

Post by NATIONAL12 » Wed Jan 20, 2010 11:34 pm

Carlos777 wrote:
Eraserheads wrote:We are in an exciting period of computer chess
I agree with this. This puts some pressure on Rybka's creator to improve it. Imagine there were no RL/Igor/Ivan/FB, it would be the same boring tournaments won by R3 by a large margin. Now R3 has competition or is it backwards?
i disagree with you guys.all these comic engines are unstable on big hardware.here is an example with FB on 8 cpu.as soon as it is losing it crashes.this has happened on more than one occasion.

here is an example of FB crashing when it is about to lose game.

[Event "0000-7160E6B413, 20'/40+20'/40+20'"]
[Site "0000"]
[Date "2010.01.19"]
[Round "3"]
[White "FireBird 1.0 beta x64"]
[Black "Rybka 3"]
[Result "0-1"]
[ECO "B83"]
[Annotator "0.03;0.03"]
[PlyCount "166"]
[TimeControl "40/1200:40/1200:1200"]

{Intel(R) Core(TM)2 Extreme CPU X9775 @ 3.20GHz 3591 MHz W=20.7 plies; 10,
207kN/s; HS-Masterbook.ctg B=17.0 plies; 355kN/s; 3 TBAs; HS-Masterbook.ctg}
1. e4 {B 0} c5 {B 0} 2. Nf3 {B 0} e6 {B 0} 3. d4 {B 0} cxd4 {B 0} 4. Nxd4 {B 0}
Nf6 {B 0} 5. Nc3 {B 0} d6 {B 0} 6. Be2 {B 0} Be7 {B 0} 7. O-O {B 0} a6 {B 0} 8.
a4 {B 0} O-O {B 0} 9. Be3 {B 0} Nc6 {B 0} 10. Nb3 {B 0} b6 {B 0 Both last book
move} 11. Nd4 {0.03/22 74} Bb7 {0.03/18 123} 12. Nxc6 {0.04/22 34} Bxc6 {0.03/
16 0} 13. Qd4 {0.01/22 68} Qc7 {0.02/17 25} 14. f3 {0.02/21 78} Nd7 {0.00/16 50
} 15. Rfd1 {0.00/22 56} Rfd8 {0.01/17 167} 16. Bf2 {0.00/22 40 (Qb4)} Nc5 {-0.
01/17 16} 17. Qe3 {0.00/21 50 (Bg3)} Bb7 {0.00/17 31 (Bf6)} 18. Bg3 {0.08/21 54
} h6 {0.00/18 47 (Rac8)} 19. h4 {0.07/21 64} Rdc8 {0.00/19 240 (Re8)} 20. Kh1 {
0.05/21 126 (Qd2)} Bc6 {0.00/17 21} 21. Qf2 {0.09/20 46} Be8 {-0.04/17 54 (Nb7)
} 22. Bf4 {0.11/20 28 (Qd4)} Rd8 {-0.07/17 18 (Kh8)} 23. Qg3 {0.03/22 31} Kh8 {
-0.09/17 15} 24. Rd2 {0.05/21 11} Nb7 {-0.05/17 63} 25. Be3 {0.00/22 28} Bf6 {
0.00/17 13} 26. Qf2 {0.00/23 24} Nc5 {0.00/18 15} 27. Bd4 {0.05/22 37} Be5 {0.
00/18 37} 28. Kg1 {0.00/21 127 (g3)} Kg8 {-0.06/14 16} 29. Rdd1 {0.00/20 11
(f4)} Qe7 {0.00/16 31 (Rab8)} 30. g3 {0.00/21 16} Qc7 {0.00/17 17 (Bc6)} 31.
Kg2 {0.12/20 19} Bxd4 {0.00/17 37} 32. Rxd4 {0.12/21 28} Bc6 {0.01/17 11} 33.
Rd2 {0.09/21 22} Nd7 {0.01/18 26} 34. Rad1 {0.11/21 20} Nc5 {0.04/18 25} 35. b3
{0.11/21 13} Nb7 {0.04/18 19 (Rd7)} 36. Qd4 {0.11/21 18} Nc5 {0.05/17 8} 37.
Qe3 {0.11/21 6} Rd7 {0.04/16 16 (Rab8)} 38. Ra1 {0.14/21 17 (Bc4)} Rdd8 {0.04/
18 14} 39. b4 {0.10/22 33 (Re1)} Nb7 {0.05/18 21} 40. Rb1 {0.09/22 16} Rdc8 {
0.04/17 19} 41. Rb3 {0.13/22 69} Rd8 {0.04/17 31} 42. Bd3 {0.13/23 57 (Qf2)}
Be8 {0.01/18 38 (Rdb8)} 43. Bf1 {0.13/23 48} Bc6 {0.07/18 41} 44. Be2 {0.13/22
19 (Nb1)} Rdc8 {0.04/19 40} 45. Bc4 {0.13/22 41 (Qg1)} Rd8 {0.00/19 31} 46. Bf1
{0.13/22 37 (Be2)} Rdc8 {0.04/18 30} 47. Bd3 {0.13/22 18} Be8 {0.00/18 64 (Rf8)
} 48. Nd1 {0.21/22 29 (Ne2)} Rcb8 {0.06/19 33} 49. Rc3 {0.24/23 13} Qd8 {0.12/
19 42} 50. Nb2 {0.15/24 46} a5 {0.15/19 43} 51. b5 {0.15/24 34 (Rb3)} Nc5 {0.
02/18 27} 52. Bc4 {0.22/24 112 (Be2)} Rb7 {0.07/18 20} 53. Bb3 {0.14/24 101}
Rc8 {0.05/18 25} 54. Nd3 {0.18/23 36 (Rd1)} Nxb3 {0.00/19 16} 55. Rxb3 {0.25/
23 44 (Rxc8)} f6 {0.01/17 14} 56. e5 {0.20/24 33 (Nb2)} Bf7 {0.08/16 26 (fxe5)}
57. Rb1 {0.39/22 19} Qe7 {0.10/18 21} 58. exd6 {0.31/24 43} Qxd6 {0.08/19 17}
59. Nf2 {0.32/24 6} Qb8 {0.22/19 100 (Qc5)} 60. Rbd1 {0.64/22 25} Rbc7 {0.15/
19 150} 61. Qe2 {0.26/24 189} Rc5 {0.15/19 18 (e5)} 62. Ne4 {0.23/22 16 (c4)}
Re5 {0.00/17 19} 63. f4 {0.29/22 7} Rd5 {0.00/18 17 (Bh5)} 64. c4 {0.35/22 9}
Rxd2 {0.00/17 0} 65. Rxd2 {0.32/23 12} Rd8 {0.00/19 37} 66. c5 {0.20/23 63}
bxc5 {0.00/19 29} 67. Nxc5 {0.04/23 38} e5 {0.00/19 19} 68. f5 {0.19/22 4} Rd5
{0.00/18 11 (Rxd2)} 69. Rc2 {0.23/19 5 (Rxd5)} Qb6 {0.00/17 53 (Rd4)} 70. Nb3 {
0.23/18 4 (Ne6)} Qd6 {-1.05/15 23 (Rd8)} 71. h5 {0.00/16 4 (Kh2)} Kh7 {-1.48/
15 9 (Qb4)} 72. Qc4 {-0.55/16 2} Qa3 {-2.75/15 44 (Qf8)} 73. Qg4 {-2.14/16 5}
Rd8 {-3.15/17 43} 74. Rd2 {-2.35/16 4} Rf8 {-2.75/14 0} 75. Nxa5 {-2.63/17 4}
Qc3 {-2.75/14 0} 76. Rd7 {-2.43/16 2} Qxa5 {-3.35/15 30} 77. Kh2 {-2.71/16 1
(Qd1)} Qe1 {-3.93/15 19 (Qc3)} 78. Qf3 {-2.78/13 1} e4 {-4.13/13 0 (Qb4)} 79.
Qg2 {-3.23/13 1} Bxh5 {-4.42/16 14 (Qb4)} 80. Qg1 {-3.32/9 0} Qe2+ {-4.22/13 0}
81. Qg2 {-3.16/6 0} Qc4 {-4.22/13 0} 82. g4 {-6.84/22 600} Bf7 {-4.22/12 0} 83.
b6 {-6.80/21 76 (Re7)} Qxa4 {-5.42/13 22 Time} 0-1

Post Reply