It's running on the cloud. That's much much faster. Imagine your 7th-gen quad, but a hundred of them, all tackling your game concurrently...
NOT
Depth=18 Analysis
Sort:
You see each position in chess can be analyzed independently of the next. As far as computing goes, this means that each position in your game can be analyzed on a different core, therefore your entire game could be analyzed in a second if the cores were available.
Jan 31, 2022
0
#4
it should be by time not depth actually!
depth 18 is good for opening and middle game but it is not enough for endgames!
so analyzed endgames should not be so precise
What does it mean when your game isn’t analyzing? Or can’t on this site?
Jan 3, 2023
0
#6
Vegetablemed wrote:
What does it mean when your game isn’t analyzing? Or can’t on this site?
There have been some traffic issues causing problems with Game Reviews. Staff are looking into it
Apr 6, 2023
0
#8
I think depth 18 is overkill for players like me. A move found to be good in depth maybe 10 would be sufficient, no players in 1200 vicinity will do better than a few moves prediction, not to mention that bluffs are not taken into account -- how could they.
Apr 6, 2023
0
#9
kleidokratwr wrote:
I think depth 18 is overkill for players like me. A move found to be good in depth maybe 10 would be sufficient, no players in 1200 vicinity will do better than a few moves prediction, not to mention that bluffs are not taken into account -- how could they.
I prefer a higher depth. There can be moves evaluated as good at lower depths that are bad at higher ones.
Apr 7, 2023
0
#10
Martin_Stahl wrote:
I prefer a higher depth. There can be moves evaluated as good at lower depths that are bad at higher ones.
Yes, but sometimes a move in low ELO is too overkill to be evaluated in 18 depth. I mean who in low ELO can think of some of the moves. I see sometimes a sequence of best moves totally strange for a human being that low, so some moves evaluated bad after 18 depth can be totally legit in that low ELO with low move evaluations. Anyway, just saying.
Apr 7, 2023
0
#11
I like depth 24 so its pretty accurate and it takes only a minute. Prob cause it uses Cloud and NNUE.
It does not go full depth for all pieces, only for major pieces. It should go 2 depth per 200 rating because we cannot understand those unnecessary depth.
kleidokratwr wrote:
Martin_Stahl wrote:
I prefer a higher depth. There can be moves evaluated as good at lower depths that are bad at higher ones.
Yes, but sometimes a move in low ELO is too overkill to be evaluated in 18 depth. I mean who in low ELO can think of some of the moves. I see sometimes a sequence of best moves totally strange for a human being that low, so some moves evaluated bad after 18 depth can be totally legit in that low ELO with low move evaluations. Anyway, just saying.
Yeah but surely youd want to know the actual best moves so you can get good at the game not just some low depth bad move that might work on a 400 , like moves at 18 depth and 30 depth arent too hard to find you just have to think about it and dont actually have to do the entire variations. I prefer the higher depths because you could do a move that a low depth says is bad but a high depth it was perfectly fine or better.
Is Chess.com's "depth=18" analysis a complete 18-ply analysis done in just a few seconds?!? What kind of hardware are they using? What engine is it? My i7 7th-gen quad takes a lot longer to reach 18-ply running Fritz.