This person seems to have all the versions incl v7 32
Btw I use Arena for testing, and i use a test suite with each side getting to play both sides of each position.
The problem with Fritz and perfect 12 is you have to run a whole lot of games because of too much draws .. the openings are too perfect
I am not sure though if v7 has problems in fritz ..hopefully not .. But I tested using arena with increment time controls like 1+1, 1+6, 1+3 ..
I uploaded it here @chess.com.
But that is only for Windows 64 bit users.
The above post should help you or you can access the new download i have created for 32 and 64 bit new versions.
Thanks for the link zxyxy.
So no 32bit-v9?
V9 is the discription for the 64bit version. if your looking for the equivalent on the 32version look for the V8.
i did a short experiment tournament of rybka 3 vs iggorit v8. here's the result:
6 out of 6 games played Level: 2 Minutes/Game
Intel Q9550 3ghz, Abit IP35, 4GB TeamXtreem Dark DDR2 1066 CL5, Asus HD 4850 DP V4000 cooler, 1TB WD Black Caviar, Creative Audigy 7.1.
Iggoritv8 won 4 of 6 games against rybka 3. excellent for a free engine!
On the Aquarium platform, none of the Ippolit family of engines(firebird,ivanhoe,robbolito,iggorit) etc play more than 2 moves when the handicap is applied. The analysis just stops. Very funny. Naum and the other engines work fine with the handicap. Cyclone xtreme is also fine.
Now what is wrong with the ippolit family of engines? A serious bug eh?
How can the programmers be notified?
Well that was just in Aquarium I suppose. In Fritz12 GUI it yields to the force move button at least, but resigns within 3 or 4 moves.
I ran Robbolito 0085g3 against Deep Rybka 3.0. I tried Robbolito 9, but it crashed in the first game after the book opening. Based on the fact that I also saw 85g3 eventually crash once, I will give version 9 another try later.
Here are the results so far for two different blitz time controls with a standard narrow book, Intel Quad Q6600 at 2.4 GHz:
G5 - Rybka won +31=66-19, winning ~27% of the games.
G10 - Rybka won +12=18-4, winning ~35% of the games.
Though I want to see more games played a the longer time controls, it seems that Deep Rybka is stronger with more time. Additionally I observed this version of Robbolito was continually in time trouble. It did lose one game on the sparse side of an opposite-color-bishop-and-rook-pawn ending, where with 0 seconds showing on the clock was feverishly moving its king back and forth, eventually lost on time after many moves of Rybka avoiding repetition of position. Clear draw which Rybka never saw. The draw was clear with king on h8 and pawn on g6, just after Rybka took a knight on move 86. Robbolito eventually "saw" the draw on move 133, losing on time on move 160. Thank goodness for the invention of tablebases.
So, I also agree with those discussing the weak endgames these things still play. I am amazed to see their "brilliance" in middlbe game combinations that I do not see from playing over most GMs games, but at the same time to see the miscalculations/misevaluation of relatively simple endgames.
I do have to say that I sit in amazement over some of the middle game combos where the computer evaluates to a significant material advantage that does not come to fruition for ten moves. The ones I find most impressive are the ones where it makes a small sacrifice to get the big prize, but is not a forced set of moves. In one instance I saw the computer make the sacrifice, followed by a series of "intermezzo" moves and then pick up the advantage later. Even if I can't create beauty over the board, I can usually follow the logic of any GM games I review, so I find it interesting to see what these programs come up with, but still do not catch the theme early in the unfolding of events.
Robbolito 0085g3 should have beaten Rybka 1 core very badly ... what was your time control? Did you use 1 core for rybka?
If you use 4 cores try firebird or igorrit v7 or ivanhoe and make sure ponder =off
All you cave-men playing with your 1-cpu should come up to present time and discover what is happening in the real world. RYBKA RULES http://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/...
Time controls were Game 5 min. and 10 min. as indicated with the scores. Ponder was definitely unchecked as that would be unfair. Being that it is Deep Rybka, I believe that it used all four cores, and I did not see a place to limit it in a computer match. I did choose the Rybka "Human" engine, since that is the one I typically play against. Hash size and opening books were identical.
I have not looked for the other two engines you have mentioned. Igorrit seems strong based on some other posts, should be interesting.
I wonder if the 009 version is buggy or if it is a problem with Aquarium. I will have to try the fritz setup I have and see how things play out there.
Thanks for the reply.
Dude, Try downloading firebird or ivanhoe and run it against rybka3. At any short time control with reasonable number of games Rybka 3 will lose.
Both Firebird and ivanhoe are multicore.
The ccrl has BANNED firebird/ivanhoe claiming them to be clones, so you want find them there.
So yeah rybka 3 rules if you ban firebird/ivanhoe from the competition.
zxzyz wrote: wilddog wrote: All you cave-men playing with your 1-cpu should come up to present time and discover what is happening in the real world. RYBKA RULES http://www.computerchess.org.uk/ccrl/4040/. Dude, Try downloading firebird or ivanhoe and run it against rybka3. At any short time control with reasonable number of games Rybka 3 will lose. Both Firebird and ivanhoe are multicore. The ccrl has BANNED firebird/ivanhoe claiming them to be clones, so you want find them there. So yeah rybka 3 rules if you ban firebird/ivanhoe from the competition.
zxzyz..you are evidently a salesman for firebird/ivanhoe. The CCRL would not have banned them without just cause. RYBKA STILL RULES.
yeah, pay me $100 and I will show you where to download it and how to set up an engine match to see that it beats Rybka ...
keep believing what you want buddy -- But I can see for myself that Rybka gets beaten quite soundly by these new engines ..
Very wild eh? Why dont you come out of the garbage-can and check it out for yourself? 1cpu is history. All the cavemen (assuming that whats leftover in this sham world is just a mixture of dogs, cats and cavemen :)) here are trying it out on 2 or 4 cpu. And @zxzyz is right. On shorter tc (if you can understand what that means) Rybka 3 any core has its belt and pants stripped down and processed to the core!!
Some tailless monkeys think that they can just type away some keys at random and run about wild without consequences.
By the way, can the Rybka engineers or the ccrl topdogs give an open account of the sourcecodes of the theoretical "clones" that they claim these engines to be? huh?
Once I had engine match Rybka v/s Chess.com
Rybka lost it
chess.com puzzle of the day:
New gamer1b1r1k1/pq3p1p/1p2np1Q/3p1N2/3Rn3/6PB/P4P1P/4R1K1 w - - 0 1Analysis by Rybka 3 1. +- (#5): 1.Rexe4 2. +- (4.31): 1.Bg2 N4g5 2.Bxd5 Qc7 3.Rg4 a5 4.Bxa8 3. +- (2.72): 1.f3 Qc7 2.fxe4 Qe5 3.Rxd5
New gamer1b1r1k1/pq3p1p/1p2np1Q/3p1N2/3Rn3/6PB/P4P1P/4R1K1 w - - 0 1Analysis by IvanHoe 9.64b w32_:1. +- (#5): 1.Rexe4 Qe7 2.Rg4+ Kh8 3.Nxe7 Rf8 4.Qxf6+ Ng7 5.Qxg7# 2. +- (6.23): 1.f3 Qe7 2.Nxe7+ Rxe7 3.Bxe6 Bxe6 4.fxe4 Bf5 5.Rxd5 Rxe4 6.Rxe4 Bxe4 7.Rd2 Bg6 8.Qf4 f5 9.Rd7 a6 10.Qc7 b5 11.Qc6 Re8 12.Qxa6 3. +- (4.06): 1.Bg2 N4g5 2.Qxf6 h5 3.Bxd5 Rb8 4.Qxg5+ Nxg5 5.Rxe8+ Kh7 6.Bxb7 Rxb7 7.Rxc8 Nf3+ 8.Kg2 Nxd4 9.Nxd4 Rd7 10.Nc6 Kg7 11.a4 Rb7 12.Ra8 a5 13.Ra6 f6 14.Nd8 Rb8 15.Ne6+ Kf7 If I want to see the moves leading to mate at a glance I can't with Rybka.