How does Deep Blue's games from the 1997 match compare when analysed by today's mondern engines? 

Good question.

My gut feeling is that Deep Blue is weaker than a good engine running on a good PC, these days.

I mean, Kasparov scored some points, didn't he? I think he'd get zip against my rig.

It would be good to see an analysis summary though.

That match was 14 years ago, along time in the computer world.  Plus Deep Blue still had some bugs.  I'd assume today's top engines are relatively bug free.  However a huge amount of money and effort went into developing Deep Blue, and it was incredibly fast.

According to Wikipedia, Deep Blue had 30 processors (OK, running at 120Mhz) and also 480 special purpose chess chips and was capable of evaluating 200 million positions per sec. Not too bad for a 15 year old chess computer...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_Blue_%28chess_computer%29

Deep Blue would get smoked by Rybka or Houdini on a current PC. Pretty much everyone in the know agrees on that.

I'd love to see analysis of the match by a modern engine.  I have three magazines and two books dealing with the match.  Maybe I'll have to learn how to do my own engine analysis.

I recall a couple years back analysing the games with Rybka, and it found the supposed "human intuition" moves in a matter of a couple seconds. These were the same moves that Kasparov claimed no computer would play (implying human intervention and cheating). It found everything Deep Blue played, and even found better moves on several points.