Elements of the ULTIMATE Chess GUI?

[adams161]

The reason I do not use winboard, is because I am on macOS, and while I could use it through wine, I find it easier to pursue alternatives. But this is also the same reason I avoid Tarrasch and Arena. Which says nothing about the quality of either gui, but rather their portability.

I"m on mac. i use xboard for mac. My understanding is it is basically code up to date with HG Mueller's winboard these days. I use it to run an engine on an ics and for my own connection now on FICS. Of course there is other mac software i'm sure. On chessclub.com i use my java Lantern Chess interface on Mac but that wont help you run an engine but it will load UCI engines for analysis.

[Spill_The_Tea]

I"m on mac. i use xboard for mac. My understanding is it is basically code up to date with HG Mueller's winboard these days. I use it to run an engine on an ics and for my own connection now on FICS. Of course there is other mac software i'm sure. On chessclub.com i use my java Lantern Chess interface on Mac but that wont help you run an engine but it will load UCI engines for analysis.

Yeah... because the majority of posters use windows, my only reference to the was the winboard gui, which didn't work work great through wine. It wasn't until HGM told me to search for xboard, did I realize there was portable equivalent. But thank you for reaching out. I have since downloaded and compiled xboard to play around with it a little more.

[adams161]

It wasn't until HGM told me to search for xboard, did I realize there was portable equivalent. But thank you for reaching out. I have since downloaded and compiled xboard to play around with it a little more.

I figured i'd risk telling you something you may allready know as it may be useful for other mac users who want xboard. There is a package to download that is a DMG and doesn't need compiling and comes with some goodies like launcher short cuts for the program. http://www.open-aurec.com/wbforum/viewt ... 19&t=53680

[voffka]

Hello everyone,

WinBoard/XBoard support time odds as well, of course. Just not different TC modes. Not because it would be difficult to program, but because it seems completely useless, or even worth discouraging.

It's interesting to test with different TCs.
Even if it has no real use. Just different numbers.
It's like "playing" an idle clicker game. Total waste of time and electricity but sometimes you just have that urge to know what kind of time advantage Igel needs to beat Stockfish.

Note that HGM spoke off different TC 'modes' not plain time odds like you seem to suggest for your tests.
I have to admit though that I ran into some problems with time odds in WB.

I hope in a year or two, Igel will beat Stockfish on the same time control and the same hardware Currently in all my tests the elo difference between them is infinity.

[Guenther]

WB.ini entries (only first part)

Code: Select all

"Booot_62-64" /fd=C:\Engines\UCI\Booot_62-64 -fn Booot_62-64 /fUCCI
"Booot_62-64#2" /fd=C:\Engines\UCI\Booot_62-64#2 -fn Booot_62-64#2 /fUCCI -firstTimeOdds 2
"Booot_62-64#8" /fd=C:\Engines\UCI\Booot_62-64#8 -fn Booot_62-64#8 /fUCCI -firstTimeOdds 8
...
"Fizbo_19-64" /fcp "Fizbo_19-64" /fd=C:\Engines\UCI\Fizbo_19-64 -fn Fizbo_19-64 /fUCCI
"Fizbo_19-64#2" /fcp "Fizbo_19-64#2" /fd=C:\Engines\UCI\Fizbo_19-64#2 -fn Fizbo_19-64#2 /fUCCI -firstTimeOdds 2
"Fizbo_19-64#8" /fcp "Fizbo_19-64#8" /fd=C:\Engines\UCI\Fizbo_19-64#8 -fn Fizbo_19-64#8 /fUCCI -firstTimeOdds 8

Code: Select all

-participants {Booot_62-64
Booot_62-64#2
Booot_62-64#8
Fizbo_19-64
Fizbo_19-64#2
Fizbo_19-64#8
...

Umm, it seems I never noticed your last post in that thread. :oops:

The problem you encounter there is because of wrong use of the time-odds feature. When you want the time odds to follow an engine in a tournament, you have to install that engine with 'Extra WinBoard options' (in the Load Engine dialog) /firstTimeOdds=N . The time odds entries in the Time Control Options dialog are for first and second engine, but in a tournament (or simple match) you would never know for a given pairing which engine is first and which is second, and there might also be games in the tourney between engines that have no time odds at all.

I don't understand this. Isn't this exactly what my WB.ini excerpt shows? (ofc I have left out the 'second' part, as it is just mirrored)

[WinPooh]

Support of ultra-fast time controls (like CUTECLI, unlike Arena). Non-equal time controls (for example, engine A: nodes per move, engine B: fixed depth).

[WinPooh]

I hope in a year or two, Igel will beat Stockfish on the same time control and the same hardware Currently in all my tests the elo difference between them is infinity.

Stockfish is obsolete, lc0 seems to be a more worthy goal

[Dann Corbit]

I hope in a year or two, Igel will beat Stockfish on the same time control and the same hardware Currently in all my tests the elo difference between them is infinity.

Stockfish is obsolete, lc0 seems to be a more worthy goal

Reminds me of the Mark Twain quote:
"The reports of my death are greatly exaggerated"

Everyone sees the progress of LC0.
But SF marches forward too.

Sure, LC0 is playing famously after a very short development effort, compared to other engines.
But consider also that high end GPUs have about 10 trillion FLOPS of compute power in single precision and more in the tiny float 16 and smaller formats.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nvidia_Tesla
Not sure that those Google TPUs can do, but I guess they are similar to the NVIDIA parts.

The new AMD EPYC 7601 in dual-CPU were pushing 1242 GFLOPs @ 2.2GHz base (2.7GHz boost) {so that is 1.2 TFLOPs}
https://www.tweaktown.com/news/58180/am ... index.html
So a single GPU has ten times more horsepower than a super-duper pair of high end, bleeding edge CPUs.

Eventually, I guess that a hybrid approach will win out. (Maybe 512 CPU cores and 20K GPU threads).
I bet it would be smarter than the average bear.

[Jonathan003]

I think the ultimate Chess GUI already exist.
It cannot be that we are 2021 and there is still noting better than Chessbase.
These programmers just keep their ideas and programs for them self.
Stefan Renzewitz is one of the best chess programmers for chess GUI to help humans to become better chess players. But I’m still waiting for Chess Position Trainer 6.

[Cornfed]

I think the ultimate Chess GUI already exist.
It cannot be that we are 2021 and there is still noting better than Chessbase.
These programmers just keep their ideas and programs for them self.
Stefan Renzewitz is one of the best chess programmers for chess GUI to help humans to become better chess players. But I’m still waiting for Chess Position Trainer 6.

It's been, what...3 years since he posted CPT 6 would be out 'soon'??
Love CPT...but he really turned me off.
Not just the promises he kept finding excuses for not meeting...but that damn 'Yearly Subscription' service which you got nothing for in the end. He is either (insert your choice) or a bad businessman. The latter I think...