Approximate Ratings of chess.com Computer Levels?

Chess.com 's computer rating seems HEAVILY skewed towards your computers performance. I played a game against the level 7 computer 72 moves long and used Stockfish's assistance after move 13. (The opening) just to TEST how strong the computer actually was. After the game I put the game into lucas chess and did an analysis and it showed the level 7 computer had a whopping 2929 elo performance (better than Magnus Carlsen!). There were a couple moves that I tried resulting in blunders / inaccuracies towards the later half of the middlegame that I left in there. I left them in since I felt those were moves I first, would have made, but secondly wanted to see if the engine would react any differently. It did seem that the engine played slight innaccuracies to compensate. Perhaps this is because I was "playing well?" I did notice if any big blunder was made, it wouldn't care in the slightest. Anyway, I don't believe the level 7 computer should ever have the ability to get an elo performance of 2929.

I also find it extremely discouraging, since the level 6 engine on my computer is very beatable on my own even if it's a challenge HALF the time. The problem with the level 6 engine is it's endgame is worse than an 800 rated if I had to take guess, and it makes obvious inaccuracies in the opening. Even if it plays a perfect middlegame, which usually it will play 1-2 quiet inaccuracies or mistakes, you're likely to crush it in the endgame.

Just for comparison I took Vicariously-I's game against the level 9 computer and the level 9 computer had an elo performance of 1951. congrats on beating the computer at such a high performance rating. 

I have a brand new computer with top of the line parts that I personally pieced together part by part, so if someone had just an average laptop or desktop this can really show the disparity.

No, it really just depends on the game, sometimes computers get lucky and don't blunder at all, that's when they would have a high-performance rating. However, if a high-level pc falls into an extremely complex tactic, the performance rating can't tell, it's still as if the computer just gave away a piece.

Try playing the BOTS on here. Just search members for "bot". They all end in -BOT. They'll give you a game. But you can only play them in Live.

Could sometime from chess.com please tell us what Level 5 is rated at?

Many of you folks are wildly inaccurate. Here you go, straight from the horse's mouth -https://support.chess.com/article/211-what-rating-is-the-computer-on-chess-com

And someone commenting - "level 9 I played was maybe 1500-1600" must be a genius grand master himself lol 🙏

1. 800
2. 950
3. 1100
4. 1250
5. 1400
6. 1550
7. 1700
8. 1850
9. 2000
10. 2150

You linked to the beginning of this thread. Those values aren't from any recognized horse's mouth.

No knight’s mouth for that matter either

lol my bad guys, somehow trying to link text is getting screwed. Updated to the right link. This is the official post -https://support.chess.com/article/211-what-rating-is-the-computer-on-chess-com

Would these be the exact ratings as in the app store (chess.com app) or do they differ

Wow, finally to see some official confirmation. I was looking for this for some time, but couldn't find anything like it. Well, it seems that level 10 is lower than said earlier, but still well over 2000. On the other hand, some weaker levels are way higher than stated before. I didn't expect that level 6 is 1550, as I was able to beat it once (with 1 loss and a few draws). No wonder I was destroyed by level 7 though.

Jijij

No, the ratings in app store are different. There are 20 levels in the Android app whereas there are 10 levels online. For the android app the levels rating stated is as follows:

• Level 1 = 200
• Level 2 = 350
• ...
• Level 20 = 3000+

However, beware that these Elo ratings on the app are lower as compared to their online counterpart.

How do I know that the Elo ratings are different in between Chess.com app and Chess.com website?
I beat 1550 Level 10 on app without struggle. I'm currently trying to win 1700 and having a slightly hard time so app rates me at 1600 or 1650. However, on the website I'm playing Level 4 and Level 5, which would put my rating around 1300. The later might be more accurate.

Why is there a difference in between Elo ratings of Chess.com App and Chess.com Website?
I would guess computing power. Mobile apps need to make a tradeoff between using more computing power vs battery. If the app utilizes full computing power of a cellphone, it would drain the battery quickly and increase the temprature of the phone. If this is too extreme, Android has ways to monitor and kill the app responsible for it. Online chess.com however can acquire much more computing power cost effectively. Even very computationally profient machines or specialized GPU's are relatively cheap per computing cycle.

Disclaimer: I'm just guessing. Even though I'm a software engineer, I've not researched chess algorithms complexity and run calculations on their computation power requirements. However, given the number of combinations possible in chess, it's fair to guess that these algorithms would be computationally very expensive.

Today i defeated level 7. https://www.chess.com/a/jx3NF52EJGxW

I think that they tinkered with cpu yet again.   I mean the looks is again different, it's the the same as it was when cpu acted weird (a couple of weeks ago). It is again acting weird. I played against some lower level setting and it destroyed me in the first game, and the next game, I took all of its pieces easily and beat the cpu in 20 or so moves. Sometimes the cpu starts the game really aggressive and strong and then blunder everything. It's just as if it became a lot worse in the middle of a single game. 

Maybe the truth is somewhere in between. You might be playing a bit worse, and at the same time it might be the case of the chess boom lately. There is an influx of players here if I heard correctly, and that can affect the ratings somewhat (for instance the average player on rapid is around 1050 rating). If the realistic average rating of the newcomers is significantly better than that, it will affect the ratings of existing players to some degree.

if someone could answer me on this, i would be grateful- are the computer ratings (the ones with like, names to them and what not, such as komodo 19, or stockfish at the top or whatever) the same ratings as FIDE ratings, or are they chess.com ratings?

If you are talking about cpu opponents (the ones you've mentioned and those with - Bot in their names) that you can play in live chess here at chess.com, their ratings are chess.com ratings, not FIDE ratings. 

thank you for that. by the way, do u know how to a chess.com ratings compares to a FIDE rating? they are not exatct by any means, correct? Nakamaru is barely 2800s in FIDE, but, iirc, is the highest rated in blitz and bullet on chess.com with a rating of 3200

This is not that easy to answer, but I will do it all the same.  

The short answer is this. You can't really compare chess.com (or any other online) ratings with FIDE ratings. Roughly speaking, online ratings are somewhat inflated in most cases (although on average chess.com ratings are inflated to a lesser extent than some other online ratings). There were some tries to compare chess.com ratings to FIDE ratings (who knows how accurate are those tries). The thing is, the difference varied from year to year and it depended from the fact how high the rating actually is. For instance, chess.com ratings up to a certain number were exaggerated, but after that number those ratings were a bit underestimated, and for extremely high values the ratings were exaggerated again. 

For instance, I give you this link:

https://www.chess.com/article/view/chesscom-rating-comparisons

On the other hand, you have this link:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1GcVG_slcTUJfi0sQMeaxes_jwYFBrfWaR1ejSSOH-SM/edit#gid=0


So you see, it is a bit unclear.

And you're welcome.