Not logged inRybka Chess Community Forum
Up Topic The Rybka Lounge / Computer Chess / Hiarcs14
- - By jeckert (*) [gb] Date 2012-10-01 13:39
What is the view on hiarcs14?
I have purchased all the previous versions but I feel that Rybka and Houdini are just too good.

I have been offered a discount for an upgrade.
Parent - - By Graham Banks (****) [nz] Date 2012-10-01 14:47
Hiarcs 14 is substantially stronger than previous versions, but is not in the same strength category as Houdini, Stockfish, Critter, Komodo and Rybka.
It would be around the same strength as Naum and Chiron roughly.

However, not everybody is interested in strength alone.
Playing style and usefulness in analysing are also important. Hiarcs would be a good engine to have in your stable on that basis.
Parent - - By SummerKnight (**) [us] Date 2012-10-02 04:20

> Hiarcs 14 is substantially stronger than previous versions, but is not in the same strength category as Houdini, Stockfish, Critter, Komodo and Rybka.
> It would be around the same strength as Naum and Chiron roughly.
>
> However, not everybody is interested in strength alone.
> Playing style and usefulness in analysing are also important. Hiarcs would be a good engine to have in your stable on that basis.


How would you describe the playing style of Hiarcs 14?  How does its style compare to previous versions?
Parent - - By Bloodbane (**) [fi] Date 2012-10-02 15:26
I do not know about style but it is very good at endgames(if it has EGTBs). It is even better than Houdini, Rybka, Critter and a certain special version of Stockfish which was designed specifically for endgames. This is only my experience but I think it is worth the money. I'd wait until R5 and H3 are released though, they might overtake Hiarcs in the last subject it is superior.
Parent - - By Aser Huerga (*) [es] Date 2012-10-03 20:38
Have you run some tests or is your feeling about the engine? I'm very interested in the best endgame engine available.
Parent - By mindbreaker (****) [us] Date 2012-10-04 01:10
I don't have Hiarcs 14 yet, but I have been watching thousands of games with a variety of top engines and I am fairly knowledgeable in endings.  For Queen endgames Critter is the best I have seen (I used to like Junior for that but have been amazed by Critter). For Rook and Minors Rybka with 3-4-5-man on flash memory, Endgame cache in the GUI on the highest level, and Rybka parameter: NalimovProbeFrequency set to 256, is the best, unless there is a large possibility of a fortress position, then Houdini would be preferable or a variety of engine opinions including Naum.  Ideally, some 6-man would be good but on flash memory.  It is pretty pricy for the whole set on flash but there is quite a bit that is not really necessary.  500 GB would probably hold most of the reasonably useful stuff.

There are statistics on the most likely 6-man endings but you should consider the likelihood of a botch/misassessment as at least as relevant in the decision as to what 6-man endings to include.

Also, if you are a postal chess person you want to edit the set you will be using given the likely endings possible from the position you are analyzing.

If you are utterly obsessed and rich you can get a server with 500GB+ of RAM and use virtual RAM-drive software and reduce the latency by a thousand fold. If doing that, then you want to set endgame cache to a low value as that would be redundant.
Parent - - By Bloodbane (**) [fi] Date 2012-10-04 09:49
I ran the PET testsuite. I'll run another testsuite(Eigenmann this time) so we can have a definitive answer. I'll post the results as soon as I can.
Parent - - By Aser Huerga (*) [es] Date 2012-10-04 10:04
I will keep an eye, thanks.
Mindbreaker, your comments are very appreciated too.
Parent - - By Permanent Brain (*****) Date 2012-10-04 15:59
I am also interested in results in the PET and Eigenmann (which testsuite?) sets. I am hoping for good documentation of all conditions, and other engine's results for comparison. Thanks very much! :lol:

P.S. I would contribute to these efforts but unfortunately, I do not have reasonable hardware these days. - Maybe 2014
Parent - - By Bloodbane (**) [fi] Date 2012-10-05 17:36
I had some techical problems, but the test will be done within 24h. Currently Houdini 2 leads with 20/20, Critter 1.6a is right behind with 19/20 and Hiarcs 14 is in third place with 18/20.
Parent - - By Bloodbane (**) [fi] Date 2012-10-06 15:44
Ok, the testsuite is now complete.

1 Thread
1 Minute per position
100 Positions
3-4-5 EGTBs if possible

1. Houdini 2.0c Pro x64 - 85/100
2. Komodo 5 x64 - 81/100
3. Critter 1.6a x64 - 80/100
4. Rybka 4 x64 -79/100
5. Stockfish 2.22 - 78/100
6. Hiarcs 14 - 74/100
7. Shredder 12 x64 - 58/100
8. Junior 13.3 x64 - 57/100

Looks like Hiarcs's previous good score was a fluke. IMO Houdini, Critter and Rybka are the main candidates for the best engine for endgames thanks to their support of endgame tablebases. Komodo and Stockfish will be right up there with them as soon as they get EGTB support.
Parent - - By Akbarfan (***) Date 2012-10-06 15:49
Thanks for testing EET

What was the Result on PET testsuite?
Parent - - By Bloodbane (**) [fi] Date 2012-10-06 15:52
Same conditions as before, except 50 positions.

1.-2. Hiarcs 14 - 44/50
1.-2. Stockfish 2.01 PA GTB Gran2k - 44/50
3.-4. Rybka 4 - 43/50
3.-4. Stockfish 2.22 43/50
5.-6. Houdini 2.0 - 42/50
5.-6. Critter 1.6a - 42/50
7. Junior 13.3 - 40/50
8. Shredder 12 - 36/50
Parent - - By Aser Huerga (*) [es] Date 2012-10-06 17:04
Are the second test based in some kind of positions/endings (rooks endings, or pawn endings or some)?  In my tests Hiarcs 13.2 is better than Hiarcs 14 in endgames ... :sad:
Parent - - By Bloodbane (**) [fi] Date 2012-10-06 17:29
Both tests had every possible type of endgame included, from pawn endings to queen endings.
Parent - - By Permanent Brain (*****) Date 2012-10-15 19:37
Are you aware that there is a modified Stockfish 2.1.1 which uses Gaviota tablebases?

I forget the download URL but it was here in the Rybkaforum. I'm sure the search can lead you to it.
Parent - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2012-10-16 01:08
Parent - By Bloodbane (**) [fi] Date 2012-10-16 04:20
Thanks for the tip, I was only aware of the 2.01 version.
Parent - By Graham Banks (****) [nz] Date 2012-10-02 20:11

> How would you describe the playing style of Hiarcs 14?  How does its style compare to previous versions?


Since Hiarcs Paderborn, which played aggressive and entertaining chess, the style of play has moved more towards being solid. Still dangerous and quick to seize on attacking opportunities when they may arise though, but you could say that for most of the top engines these days.
Parent - - By Ray (****) Date 2012-10-04 13:02

>> How would you describe the playing style of Hiarcs 14?


I think it is a myth that Hiarcs has some sort of unique style.

But as I said before, if you have the money, purchase it, why not. But in the knowledge that you have an engine a lot weaker than many free alternatives that may or may not offer you much over and above them.
Parent - - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2012-10-05 05:37

> I think it is a myth that Hiarcs has some sort of unique style.


In my experience, the claims for Hiarcs having a unique style were very true, at least for the Paderborn 2007 version. I would always go with it when all other engines were suggesting some kind of plan I didn't like, and I needed something new. Even in positions where most other engines had consensus that a move was best and the alternatives were worse, Hiarcs would like one of the alternatives and provide interesting alternative plans.

Later on, Critter 0.70 fulfilled this role better, because besides having such original ideas, they also proved devastating, and with there being only so much one can analyze, I had to drop Hiarcs, but its originality stands.
Parent - - By Dr.Wael Deeb (***) [jo] Date 2012-10-05 13:17
I guess you mean Critter 0.90 because this is my impression too related the above mention d issue....
Dr.D
Parent - By Uly (Gold) [mx] Date 2012-10-07 02:49
Critter 0.90 made Critter 0.70 obsolete in this regard, but Critter 0.70 was already doing this. 0.90 fulfilled more the role of "main engine you can rely on for the entire game, as the first engine you use to check the position" than the role of "an engine checked for other ideas not already considered", so I ended using 0.70 and 0.90 together for a while, then 1.0 and 0.70, but then I noticed 0.90 and 1.2 were having low redundancy, and now I use 1.6a (tried to downgrade due to problems with Large Pages but I had so much analysis stored on its Session File that I had to live with it) and 0.90 together dropping 0.70 definitely from lineup.
Parent - By Ray (****) Date 2012-10-01 19:36
Not worth purchasing in my opinion. Lots of better free engines out there. But if you have the money, why not.
Parent - By The Truth (**) [de] Date 2012-10-02 05:13 Edited 2012-10-02 05:22
You're better off funneling that money to your hardware, there are a handful of freeware engines a hundred elo stronger than hiarcs. I personally find it a joke they even sell this thing.
If you're fan of weak engines, then you can buy fritz 13 at least you get a decent GUI and access to playchess in addition to the engine.
Parent - By Arrière Pensée (Gold) Date 2012-10-02 21:37

> I have been offered a discount for an upgrade


Take it if they throw in round trip tickets ( with first class airline seats) -three night at a 5 star hotel- all expenses paid. Front row seats to watch  Viswanathan Anand, play his next match.

After a couple drinks at the hotel bar you can power up your laptop and watch Hiarcs 14 get wiped by any of the top four chess engines and fall off your bar stool laughing your ass off.
Parent - - By Razor (****) [gb] Date 2012-10-03 04:43
What do you use a chess engine for?
Parent - By jeckert (*) [gb] Date 2012-10-05 07:14
Thank-you to all the people that took the trouble to reply.
I mainly use engines to analyse positions from my own games.
In the past I found that Hiarcs had a better understanding of positions particularly when it is about long range strategic issues.
Rybka is now superior but I would switch on 13.2 out of interest.
Houdini is in my opinion not very good even if it is the strongest by elo.

Regards
Up Topic The Rybka Lounge / Computer Chess / Hiarcs14

Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill