Re: GTX-660 Ti benchmark

From: Aron Broom (broomsday_at_gmail.com)
Date: Thu Sep 13 2012 - 18:01:14 CDT

Thanks for posting these, I've been very curious about the 600 series
performance.

It looks like at the moment the performance is roughly on par with a GTX
570 or M2070 card.

I would suspect that with some optimization specific for these cards future
releases might be much faster? Or is your sense that this is where they
will be staying?

I guess one thing to note is that based on a rapid google-search, the H77
chipset would be a PCI 2.0, so the CUDA performance may be suffering from
not being able to use the full card on account of bandwidth limitations,
which could be alleviated with a PCI 3.0. Maybe this idea is supported by
the low power consumption. I wonder if the power consumption is higher
with AMBER or OpenMM/GROMACS? I noticed when doing things on the previous
line of cards that NAMD produced far less GPU heat than other packages.

Thanks again for the post!

~Aron

On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 3:50 PM, Thomas Albers <talbers_at_binghamton.edu>wrote:

> Hello!
>
> Since someone was asking a few days back regarding performance of Kepler
> GPUs, here are some benchmarking results. This is with the
> Linux-x86_64-multicore and Linux-x86_64-multicore-CUDA builds of NAMD
> 2.9 as downloaded from the NAMD website, on a system with i5-3570 CPU
> and Intel H77 chipset and a GTX-660 TI graphics card. Power consumption
> with GPU acceleration is about 200 W.
>
> The last three are from the Daresbury benchmark suite, download here:
> http://www.stfc.ac.uk/CSE/randd/cbg/Benchmark/25241.aspx
>
> Timing results in s/step.
>
> NAMD NAMD-CUDA
> ApoA1 (90K atoms) 0.187 0.038
> F1ATPase (330K atoms) 0.537 0.136
> STMV (1M atoms) 2.351 0.472
> GlnBP (61K atoms) 0.140 0.030
> EGFR-flat (465K atoms) 1.136 0.267
> EGFR-tall (1.4 M atoms) 3.421 0.755
>
> Thomas
>
>

-- 
Aron Broom M.Sc
PhD Student
Department of Chemistry
University of Waterloo

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Mon Dec 31 2012 - 23:22:04 CST