can stockfish beat Magnus Carsen

can stockfish beat Magnus Carsen?

No. It's made of fish.

From play magnus the app. Or the human magnus who loses to his own app?

Yes, engines have surpassed humans

Yes

You only say that because you're a shark.

You side with the other sea life.

lol

A more interesting question is what's the least efficient machine that Stockfish can be compiled to and run in, and whether it can beat Carlsen then (using reasonable time controls).

It's one thing to run Stockfish on a 5 GHz 8-core i7 with 16 GB of RAM. Another is running it on a 60 MHz 486 with 8 MB of RAM.

yea i o so think so?

Yes, quite easily possible, as engines have surpassed humans in a variety of games, computers can calculate many more lines much faster with precision. Unless every super-GM teams up to try and beat stockfish, stockfish will most likely win. However, this is only possible if the engine does not feature bugs that can be exploited such as the one in Rybka all those years ago. As such I do not believe even with unlimited time on the clock, I doubt Magnus or anyone else for that matter can defeat stockfish. As more and more new and improved versions of stockfish and other chess engines come out, it will become ever more clear that computers have surpassed humans in chess. 

yup

Actually, with a very large rating difference between strong players you should expect the weaker player's score to be made up virtually entirely of draws. This is probably even more so against engines, which don't even have the random variations in standard of play that humans do.

What a question! Of course Stockfish would wipe the floor with Magnus. Computer vs. Human is a thing of the past in chess.

Those were typical american style show matches anyway. Kasparov was not inferior to Deep Blue when he lost the last show match.

"In 1997, you needed a supercomputer to beat the strongest human on the planet. By 2000, your laptop could do it. By 2004, an old laptop could do it. Your mobile phone couldn’t do it for a while but by the second or third iteration of these things, that started to happen. Soon your kitchen table will do it, your fridge will do it!" - Anand

I refuse all challenges from my toaster.

Could people please stop comparing chess engine elos with human player elos? They are not comparable because they are not anchored to each other.

The elo rating system is dynamic in that it's not fixed to some particular baseline. It doesn't work like "if you are exactly this strong, your elo will be exactly this much". The scale of values varies over time and it can swing one way or the other. If you have a particular elo rating today, and a couple of years from now you have (somehow) the exact same playing strength, your elo may well be different (if you have been playing ranked matches). It may be higher, or it may be lower, because the scaling lives all the time.

The only way that engine elo ratings were comparable to human elo ratings is if they were anchored to each other with plenty of solid data. In other words, plenty of seriously-played human-engine games, between different-rated players and different-rated engines, and these games were played, and rated, all the time.

However, this is not the case. To my understanding no serious attempt has been made to seriously and accurately anchor the two elo ratings to each other so that a comparison can be made (via a conversion factor if nothing else). Thus, the two elo rating systems are not directly comparable because we don't have solid data on what the conversion factor between the two is. There aren't enough rated seriously-played games to do this.

Thus, giving an exact number like "according to elo difference Carlsen will beat Stockfish only about 1 in 180 games" is nonsensical, because we don't know what the actual difference between Carlen's and Stockfish's elos is. It's like saying "my dad will beat your dad", when neither person's strength has never been directly compared.

On top of that, engine strength depends on the hardware it's running on. Most certainly Stockfish will be stronger if running on the latest 64-core Ryzen processor with 128GB of ultra-fast DDR5 RAM and the fastest SSDs (for endgame tablebase lookups), than if running on a single-core 1GHz Pentium processor with 512 MB of RAM and a slow HDD.

(Sure, Stockfish is way stronger than Carlsen pretty much in any modern hardware, even if it's just a smartphone. However, there's really no way of knowing how much stronger. Making accurate comparisons without any better data is nonsensical.)

Ten years ago we reached the point where asking that question is about the same as asking if Usain Bolt beat...a car. Now it really doesn't occur to us that it's even debatable. Stockfish isn't used for competition now. It's used as the ANSWER to what we should do or what we should have done. It's a training partner. But no, Magnus, playing stockfish 14 on modern hardware, say a 2021 gaming computer, could play it as many times as he could for the rest of his life, and he'd never beat Stockfish. It's in an entirely different universe of strength. Grandmasters have no hope against computers anymore.

"That's Cold" says your refrigerator!

You dont think if Magnus played a strategic game where he locked position that he could draw?