40 ( +1 | -1 ) Fritz 8 vs. Chessmaster 9000Which do you guys think is better. Even though I currently use CM 9000, Fritz is very good. It plays so well. You think you are playing a human. The world champion of chess played it and was only came out with a draw. Now I've never heard anything about CM9000 doing that.
Chess Comes to Me as Water flows downhill Lime T. Original Poem
55 ( +1 | -1 ) I've seen many people ...... jump quickly on the 'fritz' band wagon (and I'm sure it's a 'stronger' engine) but Silverwolf makes the key observation. Why do you want a program? Chessmaster has lots of GREAT tutorial, training information and programs included. I find it great fun, challenging, and diverse enough to keep my interest with all of the player personalities and options.
Fritz may have the edge as far as analysis, but I think Chessmaster is strong enough for mere mortals under 2100 ELO to get top notch analysis as well as all of the options previously mentioned. For these reasons, I think Chessmaster is a better buy.
33 ( +1 | -1 ) I likeChessmaster. Chessmaster is strong enough to beat me, looks pretty nice and has loads of other features. Also my daughter likes the look of it and is getting interested in playing chess (she is only 6). The other day, she pulled off a surprising move and had me thinking for a while. At this rate I would imagine she will be beating me by the time she is 7 or 8.
16 ( +1 | -1 ) more about chess programsi have about the same much chess programs as listed above and am running a tournament myself which i will post once it is done.
22 ( +1 | -1 ) chessmasteris also only on the list once, and with a 450 MHz processor. many of the programs above it are running on a 1200mhz with double the memory. How is this any more fair than the other tournament you were referring to?
16 ( +1 | -1 ) Processer Speed and Game CapabilitiesI play on a 1998 Dell with 40 gig hard drive and 1.7 Gigahertz of processer speed. I run on Chessmaster. I didn't think of Fritz 8.0 at the time, but it is superior to CM 9000.
105 ( +1 | -1 ) well didnt realize that but...chessmasters rating is still exaggerated... for example on my P100 it is 2500, on my P200 it is 2680, on my Duron 1ghz it is 2760, and on my P4 2.3ghz it is 2900! i am getting a P4 3.06 which will allow me to run programs on the same computer through the good multi tasking feature (what will its rating be then 3000+???) anyway i have previously run my own tournaments (the ones mentioned previously were not mine) choosing the top 10 programs i thought were best... these programs included fritz 8, deep fritz 7, fritz 7, chessmaster 9000, chessmaster 8000, chess tiger 15, gambit tiger 2.0, junior 7, shredder 6, and hiarcs 8. the final results were: 1. fritz 8... 2. chess tiger 15... 3. deep fritz 7... 4. hiarcs 8... 5. gambit tiger 2.0... 6. fritz 7... 7. chessmaster 9000... 8. junior 7... 9. shredder 6... 10. chessmaster 8000 (one amazing thing to note: i played the worst programs on best computer and better programs on second best computer) i know things like ram count so ill just say the higher the computers speed of mine the more ram it also has.
27 ( +1 | -1 ) CM 9000It depends on your processer speed. Thanks for all your answers. Dell makes a computer with 5.0 Gigahertz of processer speed. I wonder how powerful CM 9000 would be on that. Since I am new to chess, I use CM. It helps out a lot, and has many tutorials. How does Fritz compare?
73 ( +1 | -1 ) GM Larry ChristiansonLarry played a promotional match with CM 9000 and was only able to come to a draw against the machine. I think this does not bode well for humans in chess. Our very best cannot beat the computers now. Granted the computers haven't beaten us either yet, but it won't be long, I am certain. I still can't believe Kasparov chickened out in the last game of his match...sheesh. I think the people with the computer's should not have accepted a draw. The computer would have won even if Garry had a better position because it never gets tired and never makes a mistake and never ceases to analyze ahead and find ways to resist. The humans will not stand a chance for long. It's a sad day.
57 ( +1 | -1 ) batman_255plz give me some sort of proof that there is a 5ghz pc... like a website or something... im pretty sure your mistaken... there are duel pcs that are strong, 3.06ghz can be overclocked to 3.6ghz with super cooling which is the highest ive seen. as a matter of fact i am very curious of proof about a 5ghz pc... i find it quite amusing... as for your question which has been asked plenty of times the answer is that fritz 8 is a more powerful program with a higher rating and it is better for analyzing compared to cm9k
19 ( +1 | -1 ) 5 Ghzwell this site says its coming out- not that it came out: www.theinquirer.net/?article=2462
36 ( +1 | -1 ) Chess_champion...5ghz isnt that unbelievable...they are testing insane stuff currently like 100ghz!!...well i think... i know for sure 50ghz... but still!! not practical at all yet though...with the best cooling they cant keep it running for more than a fraction of time...its also a rediculously large size as well
11 ( +1 | -1 ) with all that said...they are probably large super computers but i am talking about normal pcs for sale for the average person.
5 ( +1 | -1 ) 5 ghzIt is true. Dell has a 4.5 chip for sale right now
9 ( +1 | -1 ) batman_255Suure just like that 2 GB video card!(which is obviously untrue).
9 ( +1 | -1 ) Yeah, since they havent made a 4.5GHz chip yet~3GHz is the fastest intel chip out yet, how could Dell be building 4.5GHz systems?
34 ( +1 | -1 ) Unless you are Master LevelBoth will kick your butt! I use CM9000 and like the tutorials. It really matters little which plays better. Until you can beat CM9000 on a regular basis buying Fritz would ba a waste of money. Same the other way around. If you own Fritz8 you need to kick its butt until going to CM9000.
62 ( +1 | -1 ) CoyotefanCM9k may have tutorials but they aren't of such great importance. The learning about chess is useful only for beggining players. The advanced tutorials are the only things that are useful. Those endgame puzzles are good and the annotated games by Josh Waitzkin, also the match of the masters holds learning value in it. Playing CM9K isn't fun though. The personalities are plain retarded and their play is fake. Fritz is much more humanlike so you can actually enjoy playing it. Also when studying Grandmaster games from books you can use the sophisticated Fritz's analysis to aid you in the study.
23 ( +1 | -1 ) ...?Why does it bother some people that computers can beat the best chess players? We have lost nothing if computers can beat us, and we have gained a tool to improve our own skill. I do not understand this fear...
39 ( +1 | -1 ) Ego...Imagine computers/robots replacing our other favourite past time (the opposite sex) what have we lost there....?
While not suggesting that chess is second best to the opposite sex (interesting poll sometime :-) our ability to stay on top (mmm - wonders if that is the correct metaphor) is important to us as humans. Loosing to computers may be probable but it is not tasteful...
<unwraps Ludite marching banner!!>
31 ( +1 | -1 ) ...Computers are our creation, we only beat ourselves. Being upset about the idea that a computer will beat you is like being upset that a perfect chess player could beat you. This all seems very childish. I did not expect this from the chess comunity.
119 ( +1 | -1 ) Don't stamp your foot!!You are obviously giving a lot of thought to this matter and in so doing perhaps treated a light hearted reply more harshly than it deserved.
You used the word "fear" earlier, I am not really convinced I fear being beaten by a computer... more saddened. Why so? Because chess cannot (should not??) be reduced to the single dimension of pure mathematics (indeed we marvel at the computational skills of computers to number crunch their way across the universe - there is no fear in that). Computers crunch numbers… and they do it so well.
But, they do not and will not (in their present construction at least) operate within the “spirit” and “soul” of life I suggest.
There is no musical cadence of a Mozart in a computer, there is no poetic metre of a Byron or a Chaucer in a computer (and not least), there is no fallibility of the individual in a computer.
But, for me all these really do exist in the game of chess (sadly the latter most of all).
Let computers mince digits together by all means but do not ask me take pleasure in their removing the humanity of the game of chess, because, then it is not a game... it is a science
(Of course this is my personal and as you say, childish, view. Please do not denigrate the rest of our “chess community” by extrapolating my views on them.)
2 ( +1 | -1 ) LOlI bet Ironhorse is working for IBM !!!