[SideQuark]

>Statistically, again, probably nothing.

Yes, there still is. Any program tuned to play some level does so by making suboptimal moves enough to get that lower rating, while making really profound moves more often than a player at say 2500 would make. A 2500 human has a certain level of understanding and all of their moves show this.

Ever play a top engine set to play weaker? They make amazing moves far too often for a weak player, and try to compensate by making poor moves once in a while. No weak human plays this way.

Play chess? I've played for decades, and you can see the difference (and certainly top GMs see it too). You hear in commentaries on analysis of top engines making moves that are not human. Any engine does that - tuning it down only makes it do them less, but still enough that someone that plays a lot at a high level will notice.

A human playing 2500 and a computer playing 2500 are not making the same moves, and it shows even there.

If you know any GMs, ask them the same question and see what answer you get. You will get the one I just gave.