I know I would never ever get into the position of ever beating an "unleashed" computer chess engine.
Curious what people use... as with everything I went though a "buy fest" and purchased Fritz 12, Aquarium 2011 and Chessmaster XI I seem to have settled on Aquarium for general use.
I am looking at Arena for analysis purposes and wondered what engines people use... I hear about Critter being aggressive, Houdini being better in short games etc.
Does anybody swap and change between engines ?
Chess engine for analysis & which for play?
-
- Posts: 28
- Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2010 11:04 pm
- Location: Liverpool
-
- Posts: 7233
- Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:29 am
- Location: Cove, Hampshire, England.
Re: Chess engine for analysis & which for play?
When forced to use an engine I find Deep Rybka 3 most reliable with Nalimov tablebases installed.
This runs on an HP i7 machine with 4Gb of RAM which provides acceptable performance most of the time.
This runs on an HP i7 machine with 4Gb of RAM which provides acceptable performance most of the time.
British Chess News : britishchessnews.com
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess
Twitter: @BritishChess
Facebook: facebook.com/groups/britishchess
-
- Posts: 2
- Joined: Tue Jul 26, 2011 7:04 am
Re: Chess engine for analysis & which for play?
For analysis I use Fritz 11 that comes with the Chessbase program. When I'm trying out opening lines or practicing endgames, I use this other programme I have, Chess Partner. It comes with the Rebel 12 engine, I use it because the programme moves the pieces. I find it less tedious than playing against Fritz where you have to wait for the conclusion and click on the line.
http://www.learn-and-play-online-chess.com/
Some of the most successful players in history have been the quiet positional players. They slowly grind you down by taking away your space, tying up your pieces, and leaving you with virtually nothing to do!
Some of the most successful players in history have been the quiet positional players. They slowly grind you down by taking away your space, tying up your pieces, and leaving you with virtually nothing to do!
-
- Posts: 332
- Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2010 12:27 am
Re: Chess engine for analysis & which for play?
Of all the frontends I've tried, I 'd rate Arena very high - the freebie engines, Rybka 2.2, Hermann and Ruffian (3 of many that come with it) seem very reasonable too. I added Houdini, as there seemed quite a buzz about it and Peter Svidler uses it (not a bad recommendation!).
Giving Rybka and Houdini the same tough tactical positions to analyse, they rarely disagree, but Houdini usually gets there slightly quicker. Ruffian is interesting - it usually gives the move that I would arrive at myself (on a good day!) and so seems the most 'human' in its behaviour. I recall in the early days of PC chess engines it was HIARCS that took this 'most human' accolade. Not sure where that is on the spectrum these days.
Giving Rybka and Houdini the same tough tactical positions to analyse, they rarely disagree, but Houdini usually gets there slightly quicker. Ruffian is interesting - it usually gives the move that I would arrive at myself (on a good day!) and so seems the most 'human' in its behaviour. I recall in the early days of PC chess engines it was HIARCS that took this 'most human' accolade. Not sure where that is on the spectrum these days.
-
- Posts: 28
- Joined: Thu Nov 18, 2010 11:04 pm
- Location: Liverpool
Re: Chess engine for analysis & which for play?
interesting... I must get a copy of Arena and look at Ruffian.
Cheers
Cheers
Re: Chess engine for analysis & which for play?
Do any of these engines have a good blindfold option?
I have Stockfish on iPad and Rybka on PC. But the former insists on a move list, and the later puts a small dot in the square even with invisible pieces.
I have Stockfish on iPad and Rybka on PC. But the former insists on a move list, and the later puts a small dot in the square even with invisible pieces.