Skip to content
Play 2048 4×4

2048 STRATEGY LAB

Which 2048 strategy works better?

Instead of repeating “keep the biggest tile in a corner,” this page tests the idea. Four automated policies played 500 games each on a standard 4×4 board using the usual 2/4 spawn probabilities.

2.000games
500/ strategy
4×4board
90 / 102 / 4 spawn

In this benchmark, a corner-chain policy with one-step lookahead averaged 9,474 points — about 8.65× the random policy — and reached the 2048 tile in 8% of games.

2,000 games · fixed seeds

Benchmark results

Each row contains 500 independent games. P90 is the score exceeded by the best 10% of runs.

Random valid move 1.095
Merge-first 1.973
Corner-chain 3.764
Corner + lookahead 9.474
Strategy Avg score Median P90 Best Avg moves Reach 512 Reach 1024 Reach 2048
Random valid move 1.095 1.036 1.688 2.932 119 0,0% 0,0% 0,0%
Merge-first 1.973 1.756 3.072 5.512 178 2,4% 0,0% 0,0%
Corner-chain 3.764 3.320 6.560 15.028 296 22,8% 1,6% 0,0%
Corner + lookahead 9.474 7.588 16.976 37.804 611 60,4% 31,2% 8,0%

Three things the data suggests

01

Structure matters more than the next merge. Merge-first averaged 1,973 points, while the corner policy averaged 3,764.

02

Empty cells are a resource. Policies that preserve space survive longer and have more room to repair a broken number chain.

03

Lookahead reduces greedy moves. Even one layer of lookahead lifted the average to 9,474 and reached 1024 in 31.2% of games.

Simulation method

The benchmark uses a 4×4 board, two starting tiles, and one new tile after every valid move: 90% chance of 2 and 10% chance of 4. Each policy runs 500 fixed seeds using i × 7919 + 17. These are simple heuristics, not an optimal AI or a model of expert human play.

Use the results to compare decision principles, not as a performance ceiling. Skilled players and deeper search algorithms can score substantially higher.