Komodo 5 release now available!

[Hood]

There were such a declarative post.

New postPosted: Tue Jul 03, 2012 4:52 pm Post subject: Re: Komodo 4.1 Reply to topic Reply with quote Report Post
tomgdrums wrote:
Hood wrote:
Hi Komodo 4.1,

when you will come? Smile

Rgds Hood



The last thing I THINK I saw was that they were skipping ahead to Komodo 5. Not sure though.


No, the plan is to release 4.1 which is a free upgrade if you have 4. There will be a 4.1 SMP version which will go with it - that will be $20 if you have purchased 4 or 4.1 already.

We have development versions with SMP now, but we are unhappy with it's performance - I am still improving it.

Don

[geots]

K5 doing well in my tests so far.

@ 1+1 , 198 games so far , K5 is ahead of Houdini 2.0c :

+69 , -46 , =83


running 300 games

Tom

I'll bet you have an Intel machine. Am I right? The present compile may well be stronger than H2 on Intel, weaker on AMD.

Larry, I think there may be a chance that K5 has caught Houdini 2.0c. But 1+1 is going to tell you absolutely nothing you can hang a hat on. But I am aware with you being 1000 times smarter than me with this stuff, you already know that.

My main machine is the same as Don's- I believe. Intel i5-2320 CPU @3.00GHz with 4 true cores and no hyperthreading. I am starting 2 matches at the same time right now:

Match 1- Houdini 2.0c v Komodo 5 w/100 games at 5m+3s

Match 2- When I tested for CCRL, we all benchmarked our computers to get them as close as possible. So if I was running this match for them at 40/40, the machine is fast enough that after benchmarking it, I would run 40/40 at 40/21. So this 2nd match will be:

Houdini 2.0c v Komodo 5 w/50 games at 40/21

Nothing written in stone with the results, but it's a darn good start at both blitz and slightly higher than intermediate controls.

**I think you will understand that it is important for me to hear from either you or Don that it is ok to publish/post regular updates from both in "Tournaments and Matches" section here. At least hearing that is important to me. NOT THAT YOU WOULD WANT ME TO HIDE BAD RESULTS- if there were any- but you might prefer FOR OTHER REASONS that I just post final results. I would feel better if it made a difference that I was told.


Best,

george

PS: It's going to be a hell of a lot closer in both than most think.

Since this is a public release and not a private beta version, you don't need our permission to post results. But any I'm fine with it, especially as you have an Intel machine -- any results for AMD machines might turn out to be moot if we issue a new compile to address the AMD problem.
I would add that the 1'+ 1" results can confirm the AMD problem, if someone else runs a similar test on an AMD machine. In general, we do recommend that private testers use the same number of minutes for base time as seconds for increment, though of course other time limits are also quite valid, except for very short sudden death time controls (like 1' or less) where time forfeits and near-forfeits play a huge role.

Look Larry, if you have to put out a new release for AMD reasons, are all the people running Intel supposed to just keep what we have now, or is it possible we would benefit from the new release in some kind of minor way? If so, I can wait to start until this is settled.


george

[Don]

Hello.

I can not catch up in which way it is fullfiling the promise to get Komodo 4.1 SP for free by K v4.0 buyers?

1. There is not 4.1 V.

2. It looks that v.4.0 buyers have to pay next time and buy version 5!

Rgds Hood

If you have Komodo 4 it will cost you $20 to get Komodo 4 MP - that was the promise.

Since we are not going to release Komodo 4 MP or 4.1 MP you will get Komodo 5 MP instead by paying only $20. Pay the $20 and you will get Komodo 5 SP now while you are waiting for the MP version.

So it's up to you - if you have already purchased Komodo 4 you can pay $20 and get the SP now and the MP for free - or else you can wait and pay $20 later for the MP when it's ready. We believe this is a much better deal for you than what we were going to do.

[Don]

I don't understand the point of this. Would you rather have Komodo 5 MP for $20 or Komodo 4.1 MP for $20? Komodo 4.1 is the weaker program.

If it makes you feel better, just pretend that Komodo 5 MP is really Komodo 4.1 MP. It will cost the same - and I will even make a special compile where I make it announce itself as Komodo 4.1 if that's what you want.

Don

There were such a declarative post.

New postPosted: Tue Jul 03, 2012 4:52 pm Post subject: Re: Komodo 4.1 Reply to topic Reply with quote Report Post
tomgdrums wrote:
Hood wrote:
Hi Komodo 4.1,

when you will come? Smile

Rgds Hood



The last thing I THINK I saw was that they were skipping ahead to Komodo 5. Not sure though.


No, the plan is to release 4.1 which is a free upgrade if you have 4. There will be a 4.1 SMP version which will go with it - that will be $20 if you have purchased 4 or 4.1 already.

We have development versions with SMP now, but we are unhappy with it's performance - I am still improving it.

Don

[Hood]

Don,

in the time I bought v 4.0 it was the promise that 4.1 SP will be for free.
The MP version buyers will pay additional.

Assume: I was not interested for MP version and was waiting for promised 4.1 and.... I am getting nothing.

The offer to pay another 19.95 $ for v5.0 SP instead of getting v4.1SP looks like a bad joke for me.

Rgds Hood

[Don]

Don,

in the time I bought v 4.0 it was the promise that 4.1 SP will be for free.
The MP version buyers will pay additional.

Assume: I was not interested for MP version and was waiting for promised 4.1 and.... I am getting nothing.

The offer to pay another 19.95 $ for v5.0 SP instead of getting v4.1SP looks like a bad joke for me.

Rgds Hood

Version 4.1 was to be a very minor upgrade - but if you send me your email address I will provide you with the same version (for free) that was going to be the Komodo 4.1 SP upgrade. Just tell me what your platform is and I will make a special compile for you. Use the same email you used to make the original purchase for the audit trail.

Don

[melajara]

Here are the IPON final results, prime time

Komodo 5

Komodo 5 - Houdini 2.0 STD (3028) 70.5 - 79.5 47.00% Perf=3008
Komodo 5 - Critter 1.6a (2973) 85.5 - 64.5 57.00% Perf=3021
Komodo 5 - Stockfish 2.2.2 JA (2966) 82.5 - 67.5 55.00% Perf=3000
Komodo 5 - Deep Rybka 4.1 (2956) 81.5 - 68.5 54.33% Perf=2986
Komodo 5 - Naum 4.2 (2834) 115.5 - 34.5 77.00% Perf=3043
Komodo 5 - Deep Shredder 12 (2800) 115.5 - 34.5 77.00% Perf=3009
Komodo 5 - Gull 1.2 (2796) 122.0 - 28.0 81.33% Perf=3051
Komodo 5 - Hannibal 1.2 (2792) 110.5 - 39.5 73.67% Perf=2970
Komodo 5 - Deep Sjeng c't 2010 32b (2791) 121.5 - 28.5 81.00% Perf=3042
Komodo 5 - Spike 1.4 32b (2782) 125.5 - 24.5 83.67% Perf=3065
Komodo 5 - spark-1.0 (2764) 127.0 - 23.0 84.67% Perf=3060
Komodo 5 - Protector 1.4.0 (2755) 126.0 - 24.0 84.00% Perf=3043
Komodo 5 - Deep Junior 13.3 (2744) 126.0 - 24.0 84.00% Perf=3032
Komodo 5 - HIARCS 13.2 MP 32b (2743) 127.0 - 23.0 84.67% Perf=3039
Komodo 5 - Quazar 0.4 (2732) 124.0 - 26.0 82.67% Perf=3003
Komodo 5 - Zappa Mexico II (2699) 130.5 - 19.5 87.00% Perf=3029
Komodo 5 - MinkoChess 1.3 (2691) 124.0 - 26.0 82.67% Perf=2962
1915.0 - 635.0 75.10% Perf=3005


2550 out of 2550 games played
Level: 5 Minutes/Game + 3 Seconds/Move


Assuming an AMD optimized executable makes you win circa 20 ELO over that one, you could pass Houdini 2c on this list.
Inasmuch as Houdart has an AMD optimized compile(?), it is worth another attempt, no?

[Don]

Here are the IPON final results, prime time

Komodo 5

Komodo 5 - Houdini 2.0 STD (3028) 70.5 - 79.5 47.00% Perf=3008
Komodo 5 - Critter 1.6a (2973) 85.5 - 64.5 57.00% Perf=3021
Komodo 5 - Stockfish 2.2.2 JA (2966) 82.5 - 67.5 55.00% Perf=3000
Komodo 5 - Deep Rybka 4.1 (2956) 81.5 - 68.5 54.33% Perf=2986
Komodo 5 - Naum 4.2 (2834) 115.5 - 34.5 77.00% Perf=3043
Komodo 5 - Deep Shredder 12 (2800) 115.5 - 34.5 77.00% Perf=3009
Komodo 5 - Gull 1.2 (2796) 122.0 - 28.0 81.33% Perf=3051
Komodo 5 - Hannibal 1.2 (2792) 110.5 - 39.5 73.67% Perf=2970
Komodo 5 - Deep Sjeng c't 2010 32b (2791) 121.5 - 28.5 81.00% Perf=3042
Komodo 5 - Spike 1.4 32b (2782) 125.5 - 24.5 83.67% Perf=3065
Komodo 5 - spark-1.0 (2764) 127.0 - 23.0 84.67% Perf=3060
Komodo 5 - Protector 1.4.0 (2755) 126.0 - 24.0 84.00% Perf=3043
Komodo 5 - Deep Junior 13.3 (2744) 126.0 - 24.0 84.00% Perf=3032
Komodo 5 - HIARCS 13.2 MP 32b (2743) 127.0 - 23.0 84.67% Perf=3039
Komodo 5 - Quazar 0.4 (2732) 124.0 - 26.0 82.67% Perf=3003
Komodo 5 - Zappa Mexico II (2699) 130.5 - 19.5 87.00% Perf=3029
Komodo 5 - MinkoChess 1.3 (2691) 124.0 - 26.0 82.67% Perf=2962
1915.0 - 635.0 75.10% Perf=3005


2550 out of 2550 games played
Level: 5 Minutes/Game + 3 Seconds/Move


Assuming an AMD optimized executable makes you win circa 20 ELO over that one, you could pass Houdini 2c on this list.
Inasmuch as Houdart has an AMD optimized compile(?), it is worth another attempt, no?

It's not clear to us whether Komodo really suffers or not, but I don't think it is as much as 20 ELO. A test I would like to see someone run is this:

Run a time test on Intel using any program such as Houdini or Critter - and compare it directly to Komodo, perhaps running the opening position to depth 18 or something unless you have a more comprehesive timing test.

The run the same test on an AMD machine and get the ratio of it. See if they are comparable. Could someone do that on AMD? Here is what I suggest - since I have only Houdini 1.5:

To be consisent, open up a command prompt in Houdini 1.5 and do this:

setoption name Threads value 1
position startpos
do depth 18

Note the final line with a time.

Then do it with Komodo 5. I will do this same test on my Intel machine and we can compare ratio. Maybe there is a problem, many there is not.

Don

[lkaufman]

K5 doing well in my tests so far.

@ 1+1 , 198 games so far , K5 is ahead of Houdini 2.0c :

+69 , -46 , =83


running 300 games

Tom

I'll bet you have an Intel machine. Am I right? The present compile may well be stronger than H2 on Intel, weaker on AMD.

Larry, I think there may be a chance that K5 has caught Houdini 2.0c. But 1+1 is going to tell you absolutely nothing you can hang a hat on. But I am aware with you being 1000 times smarter than me with this stuff, you already know that.

My main machine is the same as Don's- I believe. Intel i5-2320 CPU @3.00GHz with 4 true cores and no hyperthreading. I am starting 2 matches at the same time right now:

Match 1- Houdini 2.0c v Komodo 5 w/100 games at 5m+3s

Match 2- When I tested for CCRL, we all benchmarked our computers to get them as close as possible. So if I was running this match for them at 40/40, the machine is fast enough that after benchmarking it, I would run 40/40 at 40/21. So this 2nd match will be:

Houdini 2.0c v Komodo 5 w/50 games at 40/21

Nothing written in stone with the results, but it's a darn good start at both blitz and slightly higher than intermediate controls.

**I think you will understand that it is important for me to hear from either you or Don that it is ok to publish/post regular updates from both in "Tournaments and Matches" section here. At least hearing that is important to me. NOT THAT YOU WOULD WANT ME TO HIDE BAD RESULTS- if there were any- but you might prefer FOR OTHER REASONS that I just post final results. I would feel better if it made a difference that I was told.


Best,

george

PS: It's going to be a hell of a lot closer in both than most think.

Since this is a public release and not a private beta version, you don't need our permission to post results. But any I'm fine with it, especially as you have an Intel machine -- any results for AMD machines might turn out to be moot if we issue a new compile to address the AMD problem.
I would add that the 1'+ 1" results can confirm the AMD problem, if someone else runs a similar test on an AMD machine. In general, we do recommend that private testers use the same number of minutes for base time as seconds for increment, though of course other time limits are also quite valid, except for very short sudden death time controls (like 1' or less) where time forfeits and near-forfeits play a huge role.

Look Larry, if you have to put out a new release for AMD reasons, are all the people running Intel supposed to just keep what we have now, or is it possible we would benefit from the new release in some kind of minor way? If so, I can wait to start until this is settled.


george

If there is a new release for AMD, it will probably be nearly identical to the present one for Intel machines, and we would tell everyone to treat them as identical on Intel. So go ahead. Of course anything is possible in life, maybe we'll discover that it suddenly runs twice as fast (and maybe it will snow tomorrow in midsummer!).

[WuShock]

i7 / 940 @ 2.93 , klo_150 openings , 512 mb , ponder off , Komodo no egtb , Houdini using 3-4-5 , F12 finds them no matter what...........

[/code]

Code: Select all