Is stockfish 8 or komodo a stronger engine

I've been thinking recently, would stockfish or komodo, two of the strongest engines in the world win in a game against each other?

Stockfish has more brute strength but Komodo seems to have more positional sense IMO

Currently, now, Komodo 11 would beat Stockfish 8. But the developers of Stockfish would be coming up with Stockfish 9. This would literally beat the sh** out of Komodo 11.

The over riding factor is the hardware being used. Komodo does better with unlimited processing. It won the WC using 48 cores. Beat Johnny in a playoff that used 2000+ cores ! Stockfish won the TCEC software title on limited hardware, basically a top end lap top. Shredder won the WC in Leiden for software. These events place parameters and restrictions that effect the performance of the software. Houdini placed 2nd to Stockfish.

The competitions are timed events which inherently effects performance with the type of hardware being used obviously playing a large role.

When is stockfish 9 coming out?

Just for those who don't know.  When they did the analysis of the engines.  Stockfish and Houdini both are coming up on komodo 11.  Komodo is rated higher,  but cannot beat stockfish 8 or houdini.  So I don't really know how they come up with the elo?  Maybe a little pocket money got komodo the rating?

Check out the link to free chess engines in this post https://chesstech.wordpress.com/2017/08/25/chess-engines/.

http://www.computerchess.org.uk/

Coming. https://www.chess.com/article/view/chess-com-announces-computer-chess-championship

Figuratively figuratively you mean, per the idiomatic sense. Or figuratively literally, as in "forcing feces out of the dragon". Either way it is figurative, not literal which literally means "literally literal" (''literally literally" as an adverb from the word 'literally' which you misused in context of "literally beat[ing] the s<tuff> out.." seemingly just for emphasis where the term 'figuratively' would be much more accurate and nearly opposite in denotation). If Komodo and Stockfish were actual animals then one might be able '[literally ]literally' to do what you described to the other organism, but even in a closely parallel sense to that metaphor it would likely be a more figurative beating being actually described rather than a literal one (i.e. secondary or tertiary meanings of the word 'beating' rather than the primary pugnacious sense).

Check out this tournament between 4 engines. http://chesstech.info/free-engine-tournament

lol #schooled. Someone responded to this thread when a light bult popped up over their head. This guy nuked that light bulb. Either somebody got called stupid at work, and felt the need to prove to the world that he wasn't-- or I just found my new favorite troll to follow. A troll- nay, an artist so dedicated, so committed to his trade that he would whisk away hours-upon-hours of his time scouring and scavenging a glorious heap of sophisticated synonyms from thesaurus.com... All of this... To piss that guy off and make me chuckle. We need more people like you, sir. Your wasted time is of invaluable use to the quelling of my boredom problem.

Sometimes it's a lonely world for me. Everybody focuses on how chess engines fair against one another in competition. It seems to me that would depend a lot on the time controls used. Who gets to decide that? For me chess engines are about analyzing games already played. It that way they become useful, even educational. I use Komodo 8 for analysis and it works fine for me and has enhanced my understanding of positional chess. This phobia about chess engines playing against one another is madness in my eyes. Too many variables involved and too many hidden agenda's for the people involved behind their software. To me the engine competition would more interesting if the time controls were increased but in a world where a premium is put on speed and instant gratification I doubt if that will ever come to fruition. Just my two cents...

the reason the time controls aren't that much longer is because the engines usually come to the same conclusion after 15 seconds of analyzing (with proper computing power) or in other words once they hit their horizon they kind of get stuck in a loop between good ideas that seem equally good far away down the line.. but until they get enough power and sophisticated algorithms to increase their *max horizon* along with ability to detect a lot of good silent moves or in between moves at very deep depths of maybe 30 moves or more in the middle game they wont find better moves. Once they do  it usually only takes them to 15 seconds max (with proper computing power) to find the moves due to the better algorithm and vast amount of moves calculated per second.   sorry (my spelling isn't the best and I'm not the best with grammar so please forgive me)

Stockfish 9 is now here

Stockfish 9 is now here

I use stockfish 9 i think it is strong