how strong is magnus compared to a peak vishy

magnus is obviously stronger then anand today, and strongest in the world right now, but how strong is he compared to vishy at his peak?

Anand has never been the best chess player on the planet. NEVER. The only reason he became WC is because Kasparov retired and even then all he could do was win title defenses, he has always been dominated by his peers in all other events. He is in my opinion the weakest WC ever- he is no better than any of the other top 5 players in the world. He has never been stronger or more dominant than Kasparov, and as he is now he is no match for Carlsen.

Anand is certainly not the weakest of world champions. Off the top of my head, I'd say guys like Euwe and Steinitz were weaker.

These are ancient chessplayers, they were almost certainly less tecnically skilled chess knowledge has come a long way and computers have made a huge difference, but compared to their peers they were head and shoulders above the rest- undisputedly better. Those "weak" players won more than 50% of all tornaments they went to, compare that to Anands reign as champion. He barely wins anything other than his title defenses and has a losing record agaist most of the players in the top 10.

Well, when you said weakest, I automatically thought of chess strength. If we're taking results into account, then... maybe. Bear in mind I never implied that Euwe and Steinitz were weak. I only said they were weaker than Anand, which isn't saying much.

4:2

Short of a time machine, we will never know for sure, but Carlsen is still improving, and should continue to do so for another 5 or 10 years if he is motivated.

I'm pretty sure that the Anand who beat Kramnik in a match would destroy the Anand who is playing today. It would have been a fun match to see that Anand face Carlsen. 

People who said that Anand got his title because Kasparov retired are clearly ignorant. Kasparov was defeated by Kramnik (Remember the famous Berlin Wall defense employed by Kramnik). Then, the world championship title was split. Kasparov resented the changes in the FIDE and went on to create another chess organization. Each organization has their own world champion. Anand was the first to be the undisputed World Chess Champion by defeating champions from both organizations. He defeated Kramnik and Shirov (I think it was Shirov). There was also a period where Anand topped the FIDE rating. So, Anand clearly deserved his title.

When you invent a time machine, you can figure it out...

Kramnik played into the same prepared line (Kasimdzhanov's Bb7) twice in a row with white in that match and lost both, but such things don't happen often. Otherwise the 2008 version of Anand faced the 2008 version of Carlsen in Linares, the last top tournament Anand won, almost six years ago. Carlsen had turned 17 a few months earlier (and was #13 while Anand was shared #1), but had still won it with just 0.5 point more. When the Anand-Kramnik match was played later the same year Carlsen had already passed Anand on the rating list.

The 2008 Anand was stronger than the 2013 Anand but the difference isn't huge rating wise. In his four title matches 2008-13 Anand has been rated between 2775 and 2791, the highest number during last year's match against Gelfand.

Not quite.  It was more like this:

1993 Kasparov split 

2000 Kramnik > (i.e. beat) Kasparov

200X Topalov wins FIDE title

2006 Kramnik > Topalov, becomes unified champion

2007 Anand wins "tournament," becomes "World Champion"

2008 Anand > Kramnik in a match

2010 Anand > Topalov

2012 Anand > Gelfand

2013 Anand vs. Carlsen

I do agree that Anand deserved his title given that he beat Kramnik, Topalov, and Gelfand (three strong GMs, especially the first two) in matches.  Anand also had some decent finishes during that period, coming in 1st at 2008 Linares (where he beat Shirov x2, Carlsen, and Leko) and winning quite a few rapid tournaments.  (For some reason, he played mostly rapid tournaments lately.)

source on Anand's finishes: Anand, World Champion by Anand and Nunn

Anand's general results as World Champion may not have been all that remarkable, but it is easy to forget that he scored great results 12-15 years ago. Then he had to face a Kasparov at the peak of his powers, but often finished clear second behind him with very good results. Kasparov for example won Wijk the three years he participated (1999-2001) and Anand was second every year. In 1999 Kasparov won seven games in a row, but still Anand was only 0.5 behind with an undefeated +6 in a strong field. Following Anand's results the last 5-6 years it is easy to forget how he once upon a time lined up top results year after year in the strongest tournaments available. It was only Kasparov that was impossible to reach for him, but then Kasparov is maybe the greatest player ever so no shame in that.  

exactly, remember, chess players are meant to peak at 30. He isn't there yet

+1. And Carlsen with his 3 fold repetition is a joke.

In anands peak i think carlsen is still stronger the guys got muscles anand has pot belly.

lol @ thinking Carlsen has muscles.  Carlsen is a scrawny dude with hardly any muscle definition at all.

im talking about the jaw muscles enough to scare a whale shark.

But if it were a head wiggling competition nothing beats india.Jai ho!

The same difference as between Goku and Vegeta, really.

True.  There is just no way to compete with this

Or this...