Can an 80s computer beat a new one at Chess?! Amiga vs Mac ♟🕹️ 1987 vs 2020

Can an 80s computer beat a new one at Chess?! Amiga vs Mac ♟🕹️ 1987 vs 2020


What? I was not expecting that!
Wow. WOW. Yeah. Oh hello, chip dippers. Welcome to
Retro Recipes now. I had a lot of fun with that recent video.
Which is faster Commodore 64 or a MacBook Pro? and the other
day we were watching one of our favorite movies War Games for about the 64th time And of course it has that famous line in there
[Robotic Voice] So then I thought what if we ignored speed
and instead looked at A.I. artificial intelligence yeah, you’ve got a lot of that now, of course
in 1997 IBM’s deep blue computer famously beat
Garry Kasparov at chess The first time a computer had ever beaten
a champion or a dog Unfortunately, Garry was unavailable for my
little rematch video, but what if we could pit a 1987 Commodore Amiga against a modern computer.
Say a MacBook Well… It should be possible to take the moves from
one computer and type them into the other computer. That computer will think it’s the human that
thought up that move, when actually they came from the other machine. In fact, I think it’s gonna be so interesting
that for once chess won’t make you board Get it? Chess board [laughs] King of Comedy! Welcome to Retro Recipes So we’ll get to the big match in just a moment.
But first what about that IBM Deep Blue computer? Well, Kasparov had beaten it 4-2 in 1996, but Deep Blue asked for a rematch. Well,
I mean it didn’t ask itself, IBM did it’s not that smart. Deep Blue was then heavily upgraded and played
Kasparov again in May 1997 Deep Blue won by one game, becoming the
first computer system to defeat a reigning World Chess Champion. Incredibly Kasparov then allegedly accused
IBM of cheating and demanded a rematch. IBM refused and dismantled Deep Blue. It’s not clear why they did that, but I don’t
think it cheated. Even though it foiled the Turing Test, a measure
of whether a human can tell it’s playing a computer or not. It wasn’t really intelligent, not like the
chess players are. Like all chess AI engines it was just following programming. Here’s how computers did it back then … Simply,
the computer progresses down the branches of a thought tree called Minimax. Each branch represents possible future moves
by both sides. It scores each branch and then uses the opening
move of the highest-scoring branch. Now, I mentioned War Games did you know Matthew
Broderick used a modified in 1975 IMSAI 8080 running at a WOPRing 2 megahertz. But you don’t need to use your modem to dial
up to the government anymore to play chess. Chess games are everywhere now, even a Tesla can play your at chess while you
wait at the traffic lights and I just noticed this little WarGames Easter
egg in the Tesla. One of the skill levels is called Joshua,
the human name given to the War Games computer. Play my pawn to there… Hey… Oh c’mon Joshua! Play my Knight to there. Yes! Oh, for goodness sake! You stupid piece
of shh… [Garbage truck sounds] Uh, I was gonna say sheet metal. But the limiting factor even for today’s cars,
uh computers, is that there are 10 ^ 123 possible moves in a chess game. That’s nearly twice the number of atoms in
the universe. As they say in America [very British accent:] “Ain’t not nobody’s
got time for that!” Or something… So the computer essentially
only thinks as deep as three moves ahead. AKA Three Ply like Loo Roll. [Door creaking] [Ladyfractic]: Do
you mean toilet paper? Hey get out of my voiceover booth! [door closing] But anyway, Since Deep Blue or the 1987 Commodore Amiga
a couple of key things have advanced. One, processor speed. This means the computer can explore perhaps
two thousand more branches in the same amount of time. Number two, the search is more efficient today
ignoring predictably unuseful branches. The Amiga would still waste time looking them.
And other things, like better tuned algorithms learned by playing with itself [cough cough] Well, and in theory the Mac will slaughter
the Amiga because it’s faster and it’s AI is smarter and I won’t demand a rematch like Kasp… Karp… Okay, you’re probably wondering why I keep pretending to mispronounce his name Well me and my friend Allyfractic genuinely had trouble with his name and back in 1989 I thought it’d be fun to phone a software shop and mix up Anatoly Karpov and Garry Kasparov When asking them for Kasparov’s Computer game Yes you could literally beat him at his own game Poor guy! But to try to make it super fair for this
gambit, we’ll play itat least three games and each time with different programs We should also try to match the Elo skill
rating of each AI named after Hungarian-American physics professor Arpad Elo. Elo is basically a rating that goes from senior
master right down to class J. I think I’m somewhere near W. So to start with we’ll play the stock chess
app that comes with the Mac versus Battle Chess on the Amiga both around the level of the Class B or C
player. But don’t worry logic would dictate that the
Mac would still win because it could get more thinking done in
the same amount of time. Even with the same elo rating. Well, well… I won’t give you any spoilers just stay tuned. And then we’ll move up to Real Chess 3D, which
has the highest star rating on the App star, store, I mean, vs. Chessmaster 2000 on the Miggy and we’ll
finish with HIARCS Chess Explorer. Which Kaspa… That guy that chess guy said was much better
positionally than Deep Blue. Wow… And we’ll play that against Sargon III on
the Amiga which has beaten a chess master who was rated at 2200 but there would be unfair so we’ll try
to set each game to comparable skill levels and well on its highest skill level the Amiga
will take four days to move one chess piece. Now socially an average chess game of 40 moves
would take it nearly six months to complete. So you’ll forgive me for not using a Commodore
64 or an Amstrad PCW. So we’ll set a time limit of 5 minutes per
move on both sides and now that you’ve got all that info. There’s
only one thing left… How about a nice game of chess? [music] And we are joined by Ladyfractic. Ladyfractic. So you are the aluminium corner again? Ah rose gold aluminium. You, you are the rose
gold corner again that’s easier to spell in British and I’m on the Amiga gonna
be playing Battle Chess, everybody’s favorite chess game. Ladyfractic,
I don’t think has seen it. So let’s boot it up! We’ve hit our first problem with the Mac because
it has to download an update. Bless you or shall I say Chess you? [laughs] While that’s downloading, I’m just going to
load up Battle Chess and assisting us with the adjudication is
Puppyfractic, that’s you right? Yeah. I know… [Ladyfractic]: She’s wishing you good luck [laughs] She never does this… What are you doing? Okay, so we got both the
games cued up and three quick things you need to know The Mac is always gonna be playing from the
top of the board down with the black pieces with the Amiga playing from the bottom of
the board up and I will keep skipping ahead during the waiting phases But you can still check how much time has
elapsed using this handy here clock. Yeah. We have a lot of options here. [flapping] [Ladyfractic] Oh, they’re flapping! [Perifractic]
Yes, the angels bringing us the options. [flapping] So you’re just gonna mirror that on the Mac
and now the Mac plays it’s turn. [Mac LOUDLY]: Pawn d7 to d5. Surprise! Okay, so as long as I don’t get the wrong
piece we should be able to now have both computers playing one another. Pawn E7 to E5. It’s pretty quick isn’t it? The
Amiga? Yeah. D5 takes C4. Uh-huh. So now the Amiga is going
to think I’m really smart. Are you ready for this? Watch this… And now the Amiga gives its response. And for efficiency, I won’t keep showing you
the duplicate moves on the other machine unless they have really interesting animations [Computer] Queen D8 takes D1. [Perifractic]
Ahh… Check! Dissapointing. [Ladyfractic] Oh! She’s got
quite a shimmy. [Perifractic] Sassy pants. [Ladyfractic] That’s a way to do it. [Perifractic]
I wasn’t expecting that. King takes Queen. [Ladyfractic] Wait… Oh!
[Perifractic] Why they hugging? [Ladyfractic] What? Ahh that was violent. Should I laugh at that? [Ladyfractic] That’s
definitely dated. It’s very Okay [Ladyfractic] Okay much less violent
[Perifractic] So civilized. [computer] Knight D8 to C6. So Knights, I’ll give you a little lesson in chess and
Knights can only move in an L shape and they’re the only piece that can jump over other pieces. That’s how I was able to get from behind those
pawns. This horsey [horse]: [snorting] That’s my horse, all right. Come on Knight. This
one doesn’t jump. He doesn’t have a horse. I swear it’s like “Pardon me. Pardon me”.
[Perifractic] Amiga is thinking. Bishop C8 to F5. Bishops can only move diagonally. See look it’s thinking now. [Perifractic]
It’s actually Bruce Forsyth! [computer] Castle Queenside. [Perifractic]
Oh So the castle can only go in straight lines.
Otherwise known as the Rook and it’s the only piece that can switch. [music] [computer] D8 to D7 [Perifractic] I thought
the Mac would have slaughtered the Amiga by now, but they’re actually having an involved, pretty good game of chess. All right. My little pawn has gone forward
to. [Ladyfractic, American accent] Pawn [Perifractic] Pawn. Right? [Ladyfractic] Pawn. [American computer] Pawn F7 to F6. [Perifractic] She’s American
she’s cheating. Is it thinking? [Ladyfractic] No, that was your move. [Perifractic] Oh, I so
busy thinking about pawn… [computer] Pawn G7 takes F6. [Ladyfractic]
Pawn-Chi [Perifractic] Pawn cheese? [laughs] Bishop’s scared. E6 to E7 [computer] Pawn C7 to C6. [Ladyfractic] Don’t
you think it’s taking a little bit longer now. [Perifractic] Yes, it’s It”s still limiting itself to about 20 seconds.
[computer] Bishop F5 takes G4 [fighting] [Ladyfractic, Cockney accent] That’s
not very ladylike.[Perifractic] [laughs] We’re thinking? What if the pawn actually beat the Bishop. It sounds like the beginning of a joke. [computer]
Knight G8 takes F6. [Ladyfractic] Let’s see how a Knight assaults Bishop. [computer]:
[cries] Off with his head! [laughs] [Ladyfractic] okayyy [Perifractic] Sad. Thank goodness for that [computer] Pawn C6 takes D5. [computer] [cries] He hit him in the crotch! [Perifractic] Good knight! Wait. Oh, so I got Check. [Ladyfractic] What? [computer] King C8 to B8. I mean that’s kind of amazing that even if
the Amiga loses the Amiga still got Check against the Mac. The Mac got it much sooner. [Perifractic]
yeah the Mac got it straight away. [Ladyfractic] But the Amiga has been able to elude it the whole time. [computer] D7 to D5 [Perifractic] Yeah Bishop G4 to F3 D5 takes a F4 PCB Way are absolutely terrible at making
chess boards, but if you need some PCBs, we wecommend … we wecommend [Ladyfractic] Okay, Elmer Fudd. [Perifractic]
[laughs] PCB Wayyyy. [Ladyfractic] because as we all know PCB stands for printed
circu– [Perifractic] Playing chess boards You ruined it. I did, I did. If only you could take it back.
Yeah. Okay. Let’s see what you got now Did you see how fast she responded she was “I’m gonna murder you'” D6 to B4 Check. Oh It’s exposed the rook at the top of the board By getting out of the way the rook could now
travel straight down and take the king Actually, very educational for someone like
me that does not play chess Yeah would not have. Reminded me of some techniques
[computer] Knight F6 takes D5 [Perifractic] but not that one So how far can the King move? The King can
only move one space at a time. I’m seeing the end of the game. Yeah. We’ll
see That’s an interesting move I don’t know as
there was much I Mean, there’s thought behind all of this.
I don’t know what I would have achieved D5 to E3 Checkmate! [Boooo] Let’s move it on here See if the Amiga agrees – what if the Amiga found a way out of it. [Ladyfractic] Then I’d be very impressed. So now it’s calculating what its options are. What? [Perifractic] It’s taking the King. [Ladyfractic]
it finishes the game Off with his crown I don’t remember that. Okay. Is your King
gonna get naked. No. I guess he’s already naked. Yes, all I can see is his wood Well, there you go, so probably not huge surprise
the Mac beat the Amiga and Took his clothes off But it took a lot longer than I thought These are both set to default basic Levels and the Amiga even got check against
the Mac at one point. Anyway, well, I think all we can do move on to two different games To see if with more intelligent games on both
sides we get a better result So now we’ve got Real Chess 3D vs. the Chess
Master Mm, and as the graphics aren’t quite so interesting,
although they’re still pretty beautiful I think on the Amiga to speed things along
I’m gonna mute the commentary and just show each individual move from each machine So now over to the Amiga for the opening move [Amiga] I am the chess master. Pretty sex huh? [Ladyfractic] Not bad, looks almost just like this. [Amiga] Check mate, you lose. [Perifractic] Wait, the Amiga?! Yeah We just answered the question can Amiga beat
a modern-day Mac at chess Yes. Yeah, I was not expecting that Wow Wow, we’re gonna start again, we’ll move up
the difficulty just see what happens the macs on normal Yeah, and this is going up to the Amiga’s going
up so we should put this up to number four This can take 60 minutes per move Now chess master had this great feature I have
to show you Called if the boss wanders by [laughs] Guess what this does? Um I’m gonna guess that it flips it to like an
Excel spreadsheet or something. Yep. How did you know? But you have to be working for a real estate
company If you use this. There’s even an option
to show it thinking down that thought tree although unfortunately, it obscures the board Still fascinating to see Right back to Chess? [R2-C4 whistles] Now this stage we’re running out of daylight So we’re going to move the Amiga back to level
one as it seems to be doing fairly well If your Pawn gets to the end it becomes a
Queen oh You are a big boo big big Big doodoo booboo. The Queen is going to F
him up. She gon kill you. Oh, is he trying to get
multiple queens are you kidding? Good tactics Amiga Another queen, oh we’re getting in position
check. Mate in one. Oh Checkmate you lose Don’t say thank God you lost an hour later.
I’m ready to lose. So it is now 2 games 2 to 1 to the Amiga. On default settings or medium on this program on this
program Wow Now chess matches are usually either two four
or six games – with no tie breaker – So let’s do one really quick final game.
The incredible HIARCS Chess Explorer vs. Sargon III on the Amiga and Will set HIARCS ELO rating to 2200 to match
Sargon So it’s interesting to see on the Mac it’s given each one a school graph of what’s the most likely to get the highest score This is so fast, it’s insane this time to
really simplify things Let’s just watch all the moves on one screen.
Just remember Amigas white Mac is black So now I think it’s run out of opening moves
and the database is now using the AI. So it’s scanning down the tree and Looking at all the potential moves and just
above that you’ll see it’s giving the scores. [computer] Check mate! [applause] We’ve got 2 little windows. checkmate I lose Checkmate you lost. That was, that was uh yeah that was a good
game. I can’t deny that I wanted the Amiga to win. But I suppose that would’ve been ridiculous
if the Amiga won this whole match Four games that we’ve played the final score
is 2 games the Amiga two games the Mac which
means it’s a draw. But I’m amazed you know if the Mac is two
thousand times faster than the Amiga the Amiga would have
got a lot less thinking done. Pretty stunning that it managed to win two games out of four Now sure the obvious answer of why it won
is that chess 3d wasn’t as skilled as we thought though We did match the skill levels even moving the
Amiga down to easy at one point and it still won But I do have another theory – in our other
video I explored Wirth’s law and you’ve heard of Moore’s law now I don’t think those are happening here But what about a new law – that AI trained only
with modern data or self play can still be Bamboozled by old data – a sort of AI tunnel
vision, I guess what I mean Is that what if the Amiga is kind of like
the wise old man playing chess in the park? Using dated techniques that the teenage champion
didn’t expect? of course, that’s kind of a romanticized view It may not be true at all but if you’re a chess expert – a chesxpert I’d love to hear your conclusion of why a
2000 times slower computer can still achieve a draw. Tell you one thing that I can’t conclude, chess
was a lot more fun back in the Amiga days He hit him in the crotch! as always thanks for watching subscribe below
and Cheerio. Do you want a nice game of global thermonuclear
war? Yes. [Lady] Battle Chess. Yes. Sorry I’ve got Harry Potter
[Peri] Hairy Potter? Do you say Hairy Potter. That’s his name.
Do it again? [Lady] Harry Potter. [Peri] Say Harry. [Lady] Harry [Peri] say Prince Harry [Lady]
Prince Harry [Peri laughs] Prince Hairy. Harry in American is hairy.
[Lady] Oh because you pronounce the “I” quite– [Peri] There’s no I to pronounce [Lady] There’s no I in hair? [Peri] Hay-ire [laughs] That’s a good southern accent. Hay-ire!

100 thoughts on “Can an 80s computer beat a new one at Chess?! Amiga vs Mac ♟🕹️ 1987 vs 2020”

  1. 🗨️ This happy corner of the world was born from childhood nostalgia. Comment with kindness. Start a conversation not a fire.
    ❓ I think a rematch using an emulator set to fast is in order! #subscribe Are you a Chesxpert or A.I. guy? What's your theory on the result? Low Elo on the program? Fluke? Peri's law? 😉 Comment below!

  2. Amiga versus mac shouldn't even come into, in reality they can both compute the exact same calculations, just one is a lot faster than the other, so on the top level of all these programs and if time wasn't an issue all it should prove, at least in theory, which program was written to be the smarter program with the most complex move calculations. What about pc chess vs mac chess on top level now that would be interesting if anyone could wait that long for the result.

  3. Remember, it's not the speed of the computer, it's the algorithms used. They may take longer, but that doesn't mean they are worse due to the slower speed of the computer.
    A note about Battlechess. There is one move it cannot do, "en passent". You didn't encounter that or you would have been in trouble.
    I used to be good with my opening moves against my brother way back then, but that is where my game broke down. My older brother killed me every time at the game. He read a lot of books on the topics. I remember it was important to control the center of the board, so my opening moves done that by advancing the King and Queen's pawn as well as the knights to protect them etc.

  4. Lady Fractic would have sold MANY copies of Deluxe Paint had her portrait be on the cover. Those lips look like Photoshopped but LIVE! And those eyes. My gosh. ☺

  5. I would be very curious to see how well the chess program for the Atari 2600 would fare against the Amiga and Mac. But you would HAVE to run the 2600 chess on a PC emulator because the 2600 was so slow that if you played any setting above the first few it would take hours per move.

  6. Shoud just let the Mac and the Amgia settle it them self battel chess support multiplayer and you can run battel chess on the mac in a dos box

  7. Uh … i tried the same thing back in the 90´s with "grandmaster" (c64) vs. "battlechess" (Amiga 500). I dont quite remember the results, but i do remember that "grandmaster" was only ~8Kbyte in size (and that included a farily well rendered board for its time) and i was never able to beat it (it had no difficulty setting, i am aware of). I think it also beat batllechess on the first two levels, iirc.
    My memories of gransmaster have it, that it refused to give up the initiative – and it always got the better of me, that way. Just when i would think that i got it this time, it would make some totally unexpected offensive move that seemed like a short sighted distraction (like a suicide counter attack of one unit to mask your overall withdrawal, or something), which forced me to react and postpone the proceeding of my plan for one turn. And then another, and another. Each turn, i am like two turns away from mating it, but i always have to first react to these seemingly foolish moves. It would lose pieces, but it would keep the initiative, preventing me from doing the decicive moves, until the overall situation has changed enough, to make said moves impossibe or just not decicive anymore.
    Yeah, but maybe the fact that an 8bit processor running at just below 1Mhz and 8K of code from the early 80´s were enough to reliably beat me, says more about my chess-proficiency, than it does about the game.

  8. Hmm… Before I even begin the video, I'm going to GUESS that yes, yes it can, as it really shouldn't take too much processing power but would instead have victory seated in good programming logic. That having been said, I've never programmed a chess game before and wouldn't even begin to know just how many possible moves there are per any given series of moves, but that's my guess, and I'm stickin' to it. 😉

  9. If you compared the 2 with a fixed maximum move decision time then the mac would always win. In the case of speed chess where every move in the game has to total less than a certain amount of time per player the amiga wouldn't stand a chance. In addition, old chess computers had a database of predictable moves. Most players made these moves because they were statistically the best based on human vs human play and it could shortcut the decision tree when one is made. New AI based systems don't use this and so can fall into traps that a less predictable opponent wouldn't.

  10. The most likely answer is that the folk programming these games are perhaps using an off the shelf AI system for the rules and movements.
    Speed of course only matters if there's a time limitation, in the amiga's case it doesn't matter how long it takes because speed won't change the answer to the data it puts in.

  11. Chessmaster 2000 simply uses better algorithm (or better implementation of the same algorithm)… it has nothing to do with machine it's running on – it will simply run faster on better machines. As far as I remember Chessmaster 2000 was also available on 8bit systems as well BTW

  12. Great Video! But now to something completely different: Did you do the voice acting for a "visitflanders"-ad that annoyed me the other day?

  13. I beat a state champ in chess 50yrs ago at high school. He could not match my random strategy of amateur play, was confused about my strategy, none used! He refused to play me after 3 losses out of 4 games. Also in 1977 I coded Sargon Chess from Dan & Kath Spracklen from their source code for a VDM1 Video card on an IMSAI 8800, for a Professor at Melbourne University in Australia. He had some connection with Dan and Kath. Even then Sargon was a very strong chess program.

  14. End Credit Banter: "Cool WHip?!".. Say Cool Whip… "Cool WHip" Why are you putting emphasis on the 'H'? "What are you talking about? I'm saying Cool WHip! Cool WHip."….

  15. I do remember Battle Chess having more difficult difficulties, and I think it might be how deep it analyzes the board. On an old CPU though, that can take up quite a bit of time.

    Also, video games have to be fun/entertaining/challenging, basically having some reason to make you want to play. So, making a chess game where you are clobbered all of the time may make the players not want to play. Difficulty settings are a great way to facilitate them. You don't need IBM Big Blue to make a successful chess game.

    The newer chess game might be designed to be beatable, but there also is a chance that the people that made Chessmaster 2000 hired a different grade of chess expert to design the game.

    That being said, there ARE games that are difficult that some people do enjoy playing, but it's very hit or miss (especially more on the miss side) if it's too difficult and/or the difficulty curve is wrong.

  16. Wonder how long an A1200/A4000 would take to make the same moves compared to the A500 if specced out with an 68060 CPU?

  17. The only difference the computer makes is a time difference, the programming of the game is what makes it better or worse.

  18. If you match ELO ratings, all you're doing is discovering which engine has the most conservative ELO replication. Just set everything on the most badass settings!

  19. I wonder how much this is testing the computer's capability via processing power versus the software's accuracy in estimating the Elo rating. If either version of the chess game was actually playing at a higher level than stated, it is more likely to win…based solely on whether the developers were accurate in their assessments. Would it not be a more traditional 'can an Amiga beat a Mac' contest by having both machines operate at max level regardless of time….or to impose a time limit and require the best response available within the limit?

  20. No you are only comparing chess engines. It’s not about raw computing power. Those 3D animations and horrible boards were never fun to play on for any serious player. You can use something like lichess.org to use a real chess engine and you can emulate the chess master 2000 for faster play on a modern computer.

  21. Battle Chess was the first game I ever saw run on an Amiga 1000 and back then it blew my mind. I am not a Gamer but Battle Chess is still my favorite game. I even own an original Boxed Version.

  22. I've never been mor fascinated by a chess match! It also reminds me of ideas I've had about getting A.I.s to interact in a similar fashion, although I think I was thinking more about chatbots. I used to play around on a program called Eliza on the Apple II, for instance, and I actually did have a more modern version of Eliza "talk" to a more sophisticated chatbot at one point. I forget the name of the other one, but it would learn and adapt based on input. That thing could get pretty silly. Eliza, on the other hand, is a kind of digital shrink that generally asks questions based on input.

  23. I bought Chessmaster 2000 for the PC when it came out. In my first game, I beat it in 57 moves, but it was such a brutal game, I never wanted to play with it again. It used a different "style" than a human opponent. Kudos to the programmers, though, because it was a tremendous challenge.

  24. Thank you so much for this channel and for these videos about retro computers! I watch this channel for the retro technology and for the puns! Hahaha! Puns are fun! Thank you again for that weird sense of humor! Hello from Santo Domingo, Dominican Republic! (Saludos desde Santo Domingo, República Dominicana!)

  25. Best battle in battle Chess is the knight v knight… plays out he Monty pythons holy grail knight fight… come back and I’ll bight yer leg!

  26. Your focus was on the computers and computer speed but you might want (as you did at the very end) look at the algorithm! You see the basic way a computer works by moving/copying, adding/subtracting and comparing BITs has not changed that much from 1900's to 2000's. Yes I am sure many of you will say but they now have ……………………. and you word be right but all of that is down to algorithums.

  27. Really fun video, but this isn't about the older or newer hardware, it's just the software and what algorithms for playing chess are used by the software. Plus, this isn't AI…dudes…facepalm.

  28. The Tesla's chess board is a pretty much spot on recreation of the one in '2001: a space odyssey' https://images.chesscomfiles.com/uploads/images_users/tiny_mce/SFN/phpg9RodC.jpeg

  29. haha, I beat my sister at at game of chess by playing my Palm Piot's moves on our game board without her noticing. Dominated that game!

  30. I'd like to see a rematch with an Amiga accelerated to within an inch of its life against a new PC and or an old PC that's around the same speed. OR! The best PC that was available at the same time the Amiga was out. I didn't know I wanted to see these kinds of videos until this one heh.

  31. Garry Kasparov had a point in that rematch. IBM got permission to all a human to change the algorithm in play as I remember. Garry’s strategy against computers was to get it entrenched down a tread then change tactics and the computer would not be able to go back and regroup. IBM figured that out and for the rematch could get the AI to back further and rethink. That is from memory but that is what I remember being reported years ago.

    Also I owned an Amiga and Chessmaster 2000. Tried to learn chess and failed. Great machine though.

  32. I have to admit that when I played the 7th Guest on the PC, the stupid Othello/Spot game was so obnoxiously hard, I used my Amiga playing the 7up Spot game to beat it. They used the exact same rules/board/everything…. and it was a 100% win every time from the Amiga side.

  33. I think the most entertaining part was watching Lady Fractic's responses to the Battle Chess conflicts – and to Peri's remark to the Mac's piece being naked because you could "see his wood". As for the reason one would win over the other, I would assume that even two chess masters would face choices that might seem like a good plan, yet not work out in the end.

  34. The best test would be to set the highest difficulty rating possible on both machines and compare those. Everything else is more a test of how good they think a human player at whatever difficulty rating would be.

  35. Which Amiga did you use? At the start (7:10 ish) it was an A500 plus, then the screen showed Kickstart 1.2. At the end it was an A500.
    I'm going with you using an A500 with Kickstart 1.2, and the A500 plus was just "B roll".

  36. The 80's was a very special time where sci-fi technology started to become realilty for the masses with these early home computers, inspiring so many young minds, so its no wonder the machines of this golden era have a special place in our hearts. Nice nostalgic vibes Retro Recipes !

  37. The Amiga would have never won if you used Stockfish 10 against it. I’m not for certain what you were trying to prove. Of course bad chess engines that are then weakened so people can play against them are going to give random results. This wasn’t a fair comparison. Also if you limited the time control to blitz the Amiga would have lost on time every game as well. So to answer your question on why the Amiga won, you basically created a scenario where the Amiga could win.

  38. I think modern ai set to easy – medium is designed to seem more human rather than a nerfed super computer that's deliberately throwing the game.

  39. Note to self: skip to 1:46.

    0:41 Why didn't you deal with the distraction of your dog first?
    0:51 Having delusions of grandeur…?
    1:18 …and here you're trying a little too hard to be funny.
    7:48 No, you shouldn't. sigh
    14:54 That's a rook.
    27:11 If the losing software has the ability to learn, then I would suggest letting them play against each other more often.
    I love the idea you had, but the video you made of it… hangs his head

  40. 4:00 Not sure how you come up with the ridiculous claim that there are roughly 5*10^122 atoms in the universe, but that number seems way too big.
    By the way, you can not use an upturned rook in a tournament game to substitute a queen. It would still count as rook.

  41. Using a Mac for gaming is like using a toothbrush to paint a house. You could do it, but the stupidity involved in doing it is borderline criminal.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *