The latest CCRL update (16th December 2017)

Questions and comments related to CCRL testing study

Re: The latest CCRL update (26th February 2011)

Postby JBNielsen » Tue Mar 13, 2012 10:41 pm

I look forward to see a result for Dabbaba 5.00 at the 40/4 list.

It should be considerable stronger than version 2.62 although it this time only has been possible to publish a properly working version 5.00 with the Pelle compiler - which doesn't produce fast code :( .

Thanks for your work with testing!!

best, jens bæk nielsen
JBNielsen
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2012 5:38 pm

Re: The latest CCRL update (19th January 2013)

Postby e-motion » Sun Jan 27, 2013 11:22 am

Thanks for these updates. Now with Gull II :thumbup:
e-motion
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Sun Jan 27, 2013 1:58 am

Re: The latest CCRL update (9th January 2009)

Postby abhishek0990 » Fri Feb 08, 2013 7:46 pm

nice information. thank you for sharing it.
abhishek0990
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 5:59 pm

Re: The latest CCRL update (18th May 2013)

Postby lostman » Tue May 21, 2013 7:37 pm

Hi my real name is Mehdi Mhalla and I am new here. First I have to say that you are doing a really amazing job. It is very interesting and allow to study different openings using lots of data.
I wanted to ask if in the future it is possible to compute an elo by ECO ? the different engines don't look to have the differnet strength depending on th ECO .

And surprisingly for the three last pgn files posted when I looked to houdini 3 4 CPU lost games with white they were only few openings and the same for the games the engine lost with black (only A00,B67,C42,D43,E10,E92. in both)

Thanks
lostman
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue May 21, 2013 1:27 pm

Re: The latest CCRL update (18th May 2013)

Postby marwan22 » Sat May 25, 2013 4:24 am

You are saying right
marwan22
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Fri May 24, 2013 12:56 pm

Re: The latest CCRL update (7th September 2013)

Postby Grimme » Sun Sep 08, 2013 5:57 pm

Why is vitruvius in the 40/4 list and is bouquet not, and in the 40/40 list vice versa?
Grimme
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 7:08 am

Re: The latest CCRL update (7th September 2013)

Postby Graham Banks » Sun Sep 08, 2013 6:52 pm

Grimme wrote:Why is vitruvius in the 40/4 list and is bouquet not, and in the 40/40 list vice versa?


Both Bouquet and Vitruvius are in both lists.
You can access the various complete lists from the menu underneath the best versions only rating list given on the index page.
User avatar
Graham Banks
 
Posts: 18198
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 5:47 pm
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: The latest CCRL update (7th September 2013)

Postby Grimme » Sun Sep 08, 2013 7:28 pm

I think i missed something, are they related that they do not appear both in de 'best version' lists?
Grimme
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Sep 08, 2013 7:08 am

Re: The latest CCRL update (7th September 2013)

Postby Adam Hair » Sun Sep 08, 2013 8:53 pm

Grimme wrote:I think i missed something, are they related that they do not appear both in de 'best version' lists?


They are both considered to be in the "IvanHoe" family.
User avatar
Adam Hair
 
Posts: 1571
Joined: Sun May 30, 2010 3:28 am
Location: Fuquay-Varina, North Carolina, USA

Re: The latest CCRL update (5th July 2014)

Postby BFG » Tue Jul 08, 2014 5:07 pm

Interesting, I would have considered them to be different (just as I would have considered Ivanhoe to be different from Ippolit).
BFG
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2014 3:31 am

Re: The latest CCRL update (3rd January 2015)

Postby l_aven » Wed Jan 07, 2015 6:29 am

i wish Core i7 4790K was used for running the games . Athlon 64 X2 4600+ is weak and results cant be reliable.
l_aven
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 4:05 am

Re: The latest CCRL update (3rd January 2015)

Postby Graham Banks » Wed Jan 07, 2015 9:32 am

l_aven wrote:i wish Core i7 4790K was used for running the games . Athlon 64 X2 4600+ is weak and results cant be reliable.


None of us use an Athlon 64 X2 4600+.
We just benchmark our time controls based on that.
User avatar
Graham Banks
 
Posts: 18198
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 5:47 pm
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: The latest CCRL update (3rd January 2015)

Postby l_aven » Wed Jan 07, 2015 2:20 pm

Graham Banks wrote:
l_aven wrote:i wish Core i7 4790K was used for running the games . Athlon 64 X2 4600+ is weak and results cant be reliable.


None of us use an Athlon 64 X2 4600+.
We just benchmark our time controls based on that.


Thanks for the answer but something should be changed . My experience shows that for finding a really good move , the chess engines need at least 30 sec i7 4790K work. I.e. 4.5 min work of Athlon 64 X2 4600+ .
l_aven
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 4:05 am

Re: The latest CCRL update (3rd January 2015)

Postby Graham Banks » Wed Jan 07, 2015 6:54 pm

l_aven wrote:
Graham Banks wrote:
l_aven wrote:i wish Core i7 4790K was used for running the games . Athlon 64 X2 4600+ is weak and results cant be reliable.


None of us use an Athlon 64 X2 4600+.
We just benchmark our time controls based on that.


Thanks for the answer but something should be changed . My experience shows that for finding a really good move , the chess engines need at least 30 sec i7 4790K work. I.e. 4.5 min work of Athlon 64 X2 4600+ .


Our adapted time controls for 40/40 currently equate close to 40 moves in 20 minutes repeating on standard i7 computers.
User avatar
Graham Banks
 
Posts: 18198
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 5:47 pm
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: The latest CCRL update (3rd January 2015)

Postby l_aven » Wed Jan 07, 2015 7:04 pm

Graham Banks wrote:
l_aven wrote:
Graham Banks wrote:
l_aven wrote:i wish Core i7 4790K was used for running the games . Athlon 64 X2 4600+ is weak and results cant be reliable.


None of us use an Athlon 64 X2 4600+.
We just benchmark our time controls based on that.


Thanks for the answer but something should be changed . My experience shows that for finding a really good move , the chess engines need at least 30 sec i7 4790K work. I.e. 4.5 min work of Athlon 64 X2 4600+ .


Our adapted time controls for 40/40 currently equate close to 40 moves in 20 minutes repeating on standard i7 computers.


No way cus i7 4790K is 9x faster than Athlon 64 X2 4600+ i.e. 60 sec/9=6.6 sec work of i7 4790K . We need 5x more time on the testing rig.
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php
l_aven
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 4:05 am

Re: The latest CCRL update (3rd January 2015)

Postby Graham Banks » Wed Jan 07, 2015 7:39 pm

l_aven wrote:
Graham Banks wrote:
l_aven wrote:
Graham Banks wrote:
l_aven wrote:i wish Core i7 4790K was used for running the games . Athlon 64 X2 4600+ is weak and results cant be reliable.


None of us use an Athlon 64 X2 4600+.
We just benchmark our time controls based on that.


Thanks for the answer but something should be changed . My experience shows that for finding a really good move , the chess engines need at least 30 sec i7 4790K work. I.e. 4.5 min work of Athlon 64 X2 4600+ .


Our adapted time controls for 40/40 currently equate close to 40 moves in 20 minutes repeating on standard i7 computers.


No way cus i7 4790K is 9x faster than Athlon 64 X2 4600+ i.e. 60 sec/9=6.6 sec work of i7 4790K . We need 5x more time on the testing rig.
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php


Here is one of our testers with his adapted 40/40 time control:

4th Generation Intel Core i7-4940MX processor (Overclocked to 3.99GHz)
1024mb hash each where possible
3-4-5-6 piece tablebases
Ponder off
40 moves in 18 minutes repeating (adapted for the CCRL)
User avatar
Graham Banks
 
Posts: 18198
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 5:47 pm
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: The latest CCRL update (3rd January 2015)

Postby l_aven » Wed Jan 07, 2015 9:07 pm

Graham Banks wrote:
l_aven wrote:
Graham Banks wrote:
l_aven wrote:
Graham Banks wrote:
l_aven wrote:i wish Core i7 4790K was used for running the games . Athlon 64 X2 4600+ is weak and results cant be reliable.


None of us use an Athlon 64 X2 4600+.
We just benchmark our time controls based on that.


Thanks for the answer but something should be changed . My experience shows that for finding a really good move , the chess engines need at least 30 sec i7 4790K work. I.e. 4.5 min work of Athlon 64 X2 4600+ .


Our adapted time controls for 40/40 currently equate close to 40 moves in 20 minutes repeating on standard i7 computers.


No way cus i7 4790K is 9x faster than Athlon 64 X2 4600+ i.e. 60 sec/9=6.6 sec work of i7 4790K . We need 5x more time on the testing rig.
http://www.cpubenchmark.net/cpu_list.php


Here is one of our testers with his adapted 40/40 time control:

4th Generation Intel Core i7-4940MX processor (Overclocked to 3.99GHz)
1024mb hash each where possible
3-4-5-6 piece tablebases
Ponder off
40 moves in 18 minutes repeating (adapted for the CCRL)


Then the info about Athlon 64 X2 4600+ is incorrect - adapted time i mean . Engines using 4 cores should use Core i7-4940MX OC not under 100% load but 50% and hence the performance should be like Core i5 4590/4690 . Looking at raw performance , i would increase the control 40 moves in 30 minutes on Core i7-4940MX OC .

Regardless , i must admit that it is a great pleasure to me watching Stockfish vs Houdini playing. Cheers !
l_aven
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 4:05 am

Re: The latest CCRL update (18th July 2015)

Postby sugarr » Mon Jul 20, 2015 1:43 pm

Graham Banks wrote:[i]The purpose of our rating lists is provide engine authors and enthusiasts with a general comparison of engine strength. We also provide other data that could be of interest.
...
.


Hi guys !
Good for You on these ratings . I wanna ask why SugaR chess engine (5.4 or 5.2a) is not included in the tests .

Today I came across SugaR 5.2a and 5.4 and it won over Stockfish 6 many times . SugaR 5.2a won 4 games , lost 1 and made 11 draws .
sugarr
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 7:16 am

Re: The latest CCRL update (18th July 2015)

Postby sugarr » Mon Jul 20, 2015 3:04 pm

Guys , I apologize that I forgot to mention You should not download SugaR chess engine from its site ! The download servers from the links send malware . But here , it s fine :
Sugar 5.2a :
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwDWup ... view?pli=1
Sugar 5.4 :
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0BwDWup ... view?pli=1

Perfect 2015 book :
http://www.sedatcanbaz.com/chess/?page_id=1694

Yet , check for viruses .
sugarr
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Jul 20, 2015 7:16 am

Re: The latest CCRL update (18th July 2015)

Postby Graham Banks » Tue Jul 21, 2015 2:13 am

sugarr wrote:...I wanna ask why SugaR chess engine (5.4 or 5.2a) is not included in the tests .....


Sugar is a Stockfish derivative.
It isn't considered different enough at present.
User avatar
Graham Banks
 
Posts: 18198
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 5:47 pm
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: The latest CCRL update (5th December 2015)

Postby AntiMaster » Sun Dec 13, 2015 12:05 am

Graham Banks wrote:The purpose of our rating lists is provide engine authors and enthusiasts with a general comparison of engine strength. We also provide other data that could be of interest.
For various reasons, there may be some engines that do not appear on our lists, therefore it is useful to look at other rating lists as well as ours.
The inclusion or exclusion of engines in our lists should not be taken as our group making a statement about their legality or status.
We test chess engines for our own enjoyment and receive no payment for doing so.


The latest CCRL Rating Lists and Statistics are available for viewing from the following links:
http://computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/ (40/40)
http://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/404/ (40/4)
http://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/404FRC/ (FRC 40/4)

Please note that the three lists are often updated separately to each other. The FRC list is only updated when a new engine or engine version is being/has been tested.

The links to the various rating lists can be found just beneath the default Best Versions list (as in this screenshot). Specific 32-bit rating lists are denoted as such to the right of the default list in each category. The default lists contain the 64-bit engines.

Image

Our 40 moves in 40 minutes repeating and 40 moves in 4 minutes repeating are both adjusted to the AMD64 X2 4600+ (2.4GHz).
This time control is roughly equivalent to 40 moves in 20 minutes repeating or 40 moves in 2 minutes repeating on an Intel i7.

Be aware that in the early stages of testing, an engine's rating can often fluctuate a lot.
It is strongly advised to look at the many other rating lists available in order to get a more accurate overall picture of an engine's rating relative to others.

The LOS (likelihood of superiority) stats to the right hand side of each rating list tell you the likelihood in percentage terms of each engine being superior to the engine directly below them.

All games are available for download by engine or ECO code. The total games database in its entirety is always available.
The current ELO ratings are saved in all game databases for those engines that have 200 games or more.

Clicking on an engine name will give details as to opponents played plus homepage links where applicable.

Custom lists of engines can be selected for comparison.

An openings report page lists the number of games played by ECO codes with draw percentage and White win percentage. Clicking on a column heading will sort the list by that column.


But why don`t test Komodo 9.3?? I see just K v.9.2...
AntiMaster
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Dec 12, 2015 10:13 pm

Re: The latest CCRL update (5th December 2015)

Postby Graham Banks » Sun Dec 13, 2015 6:49 pm

User avatar
Graham Banks
 
Posts: 18198
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 5:47 pm
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: The latest CCRL update (5th December 2015)

Postby Ray » Sun Dec 13, 2015 8:17 pm

AntiMaster wrote:But why don`t test Komodo 9.3?? I see just K v.9.2...


Look again, more carefully.
Ray
 
Posts: 14508
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 6:33 pm
Location: U.K.

Re: The latest CCRL update (2nd April 2016)

Postby Graham Banks » Sat Apr 09, 2016 8:05 pm

The next update is likely to be in late April.
User avatar
Graham Banks
 
Posts: 18198
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 5:47 pm
Location: Auckland, NZ

Re: The latest CCRL update (10th December 2016)

Postby othoma » Sun Dec 11, 2016 10:21 am

Why do you test new engines (Houdini, Fire, Shredder) more on single CPU than 4-CPU ?
othoma
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Dec 11, 2016 8:32 am

PreviousNext

Return to CCRL Public

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests

cron