Lassos wrote:The pace of progress is impressive, probably only matched by Rybka 1 -> Rybka 3 progress
I'd say that Rybka progress was quite different. Take a look at these snapshots from the CCRL 40/40, back in the day:
Code: Select all
1 Rybka 1.2 64-bit 2996 +23 −22 75.6% −181.9 32.7% 739
Rybka 1.1 64-bit 2988 +24 −24 77.5% −193.7 31.8% 663
Rybka 1.1 32-bit 2969 +25 −24 71.7% −150.5 34.5% 577
Rybka 1.2 32-bit 2964 +33 −32 69.1% −133.9 33.3% 330
Rybka 1.0 64-bit 2918 +22 −21 68.9% −127.0 35.8% 745
Rybka 1.0 32-bit 2884 +19 −19 63.9% − 93.4 38.0% 919
2 Shredder 10 2878 +27 −26 61.6% − 79.7 34.1% 469
3 Hiarcs X50 32-bit 2858 +29 −29 49.9% +2.2 41.1% 355
4 Fritz 9 2849 +16 −16 55.5% − 38.1 35.2% 1293
5 Fruit 2.2-2.2.1 2843 +15 −15 55.4% − 35.8 39.8% 1418
Toga II 1.1a 2829 +18 −18 55.6% − 36.2 37.4% 968
As soon as Rybka 1 was properly tuned (version 1.1), no one came between a hundred ELO points. Then we had some "slow" year, to bring SMP around and finally, another revolution with Rybka 3:
Code: Select all
1 Rybka 3 64-bit 4CPU 3229 +24 −24 79.2% −209.2 33.9% 684
Rybka 2.3.2a 64-bit 4CPU 3128 +15 −15 70.1% −133.7 41.4% 1552
Rybka 2.2 64-bit 4CPU 3111 +30 −29 73.3% −157.6 38.6% 404
Rybka 2.1 64-bit 4CPU 3082 +39 −37 72.9% −161.5 36.5% 249
2 Naum 3.1 64-bit 4CPU 3077 +20 −20 61.1% − 71.9 43.7% 819
3 Zappa Mexico II 64b 4CPU 3074 +18 −18 61.4% − 73.5 46.4% 947
What we have nowadays, is cumulative evolution. And that allowed SF to share 1st, somewhere along the road, first with Houdini 4, then with Komodo 8+ and currently, with the two of them. Nothing resembling the kind of dominance, Rybka showed.