Are KNL a good choice for classical MD?

From: Francesco Pietra (chiendarret_at_gmail.com)
Date: Fri Aug 04 2017 - 15:51:48 CDT

• Next message: Vermaas, Joshua: "Re: Are KNL a good choice for classical MD?"
• Previous message: John Green: "TMD without alignment"
• Next in thread: Vermaas, Joshua: "Re: Are KNL a good choice for classical MD?"
• Reply: Vermaas, Joshua: "Re: Are KNL a good choice for classical MD?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

Hello:
I am carrying out classical all atom MD on a rather large protein system
(3,300,000 atoms). The speed on a NextScale single node (namd1.12
multicore), by choosing

mpirun -perhost 1 -n 1 namd2 +ppn 256 npt-03.conf +pemap 0-63+64+128+192 >
npt-03.log

is of 0.5days/ns at ts=1.0fs, rigidbonds water.

This compares with 1.2days/ns, under the same conditions, for a Linux box,
namd1.12 multicore CUDA, with 6cores, 12 hyperthreads, and two GTX-680.

I expected much more from the cluster. Is our cluster unusually slow for
some reasons (compiled mpi with Intel 2017) or are GPUs still the choice
for classical MD?

Thanks for advice

francesco pietra

• Next message: Vermaas, Joshua: "Re: Are KNL a good choice for classical MD?"
• Previous message: John Green: "TMD without alignment"
• Next in thread: Vermaas, Joshua: "Re: Are KNL a good choice for classical MD?"
• Reply: Vermaas, Joshua: "Re: Are KNL a good choice for classical MD?"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Mon Dec 31 2018 - 23:20:29 CST