Actually we already have enough improvements that we could release a Komodo 6 tomorrow with enough elo gain to catch Houdini 2, at least at IPON level or slower. The only reason we don't do so is our commitment to Komodo MP; if we released K6 sp first many would doubt that MP would ever come out!bupalo wrote:This engine is very awesome for analysys. The evaluation of the position is always more realistic than the one of critter/houdini. The only problem is that as to run until 300.000.000 nodes to find some original moves and in my computer that runs at 500 kn/s it takes 7/8 minutes. The only problem is not very suited in complex tactical position. in those positions you have to use it a with a fast tactical program like houdini or critter.
A few questions for the developers. Are you working at a release 6? Do you think you want to implement gaviota tablebases? do you think there si a margin of improvement i the strenght of the program ?
Thanks
Here are some test results of latest version ON WINDOWS, without benefit of an optimized (PGO) compile.
Blitz (5' + 3" on each thread of Intel 16 core machine):
vs. Houdini 1.5 + 9.5 elo (2574 games)
vs. Critter 1.6 + 8.6 elo (3224 games)
vs. Stockfish 2.3 +57.8 elo (1463 games)
Rapid (30' + 18" as above)
vs. Houdini 1.5 + 16.7 elo (1621 games)
Since Houdini 2 is only a few elo stronger than 1.5, and since we will gain several more elo from an optimized compile, I feel pretty confident in saying that we have at least caught up with Houdini 2 now except for bullet chess. Note also the improvement with longer time limits (at 1' we are still behind Houdini 1.5). The same trend is apparent on Linux in tests vs. Critter.