Yes, nanoseconds per day. Ugh. can't believe I made the school boy error
of forgetting to label my axes. (fail).
Another thing to add to the ever increasing todo list.
ALl the best
Ross
On 2/19/13 10:37 AM, "Ilyas Yildirim" <i-yildirim.northwestern.edu> wrote:
>Ross -
>
>What's the definition of x-axis in the plots shown in
>http://ambermd.org/gpus/benchmarks.htm#Benchmarks
>
>Is it ns/day? Thanks.
>
> Ilyas Yildirim, Ph.D.
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> = Department of Chemistry - 2145 Sheridan Road =
> = Northwestern University - Evanston, IL 60208 =
> = Ryan Hall #4035 (Nano Building) - Ph.: (847)467-4986 =
> = http://www.pas.rochester.edu/~yildirim/ =
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>On Tue, 19 Feb 2013, Ross Walker wrote:
>
>> Hi Marek,
>>
>> You are comparing the 'wrong' thing. K20 / K20X are HPC cards, this
>>means
>> SLOWWWWWW (but green ;-) ). Thus you should really compare the K20X
>> performance with the M2090 which is the other HPC card. So there you
>>have:
>>
>> DHFR/NVE
>>
>> M2090 = 43.74 NS/day
>> K20X = 89.13 ns/day
>>
>>
>> So that's a more than doubling in performance which is pretty much in
>>line
>> with Moore's law.
>>
>> The GTX Titan you should compare against the GTX680 as they are both
>> gaming cards. And thus FASSSTTTT (and hot!). There you'll be looking at
>> 54.46ns/day and I expect about 115ns/day or so for the GTX Titan board
>>so
>> yeap pretty much Moore's law as well.
>>
>> So I am not sure what numbers you were looking at to say the performance
>> difference was not big. Perhaps you looked at the TRPCage numbers which
>>is
>> the first plot on the page and GB? That won't tell you much since it is
>> only 304 atoms! There you are pretty much at the parallel limit so it
>> doesn't benefit from the extra cores in the new cards. I might move the
>> implicit solvent benchmarks to the bottom of the page to avoid this
>> confusing people. For comparison you should really look at the explicit
>> solvent benchmarks on the amber page:
>>
>> http://ambermd.org/gpus/benchmarks.htm#Benchmarks
>>
>> With regards to your question about optimization for K20. There is
>> potential for about another 30% performance improvement or so but this
>>is
>> quote a bit of work and has to be balanced against adding more features.
>>
>> All the best
>> Ross
>>
>>
>> On 2/19/13 8:55 AM, "Marek Maly" <marek.maly.ujep.cz> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Filip and all,
>>>
>>> I just obtained offer to test K20 here:
>>>
>>> http://www.nvidia.co.uk/object/k20-gpu-test-drive-uk.html
>>>
>>> so it forced me to check actual Amber benchmarks where K20/K20x
>>> results are already present so one may compare
>>> their performance e.g. to GTX680.
>>>
>>> http://ambermd.org/gpus/benchmarks.htm
>>>
>>>
>>> as anybody can see the increase of performance
>>> is not so overwhelming.
>>>
>>> So in this context I do not understand Filip's
>>>
>>> "much much faster" .
>>>
>>> much much faster THAN WHAT ???
>>>
>>> Perhaps not than K20/K20x if yes why ?
>>>
>>> Anyway I would be grateful for any comments regarding so small
>>> performance increase of the new architectures K20/K20x
>>> comparing to GTX608.
>>>
>>> I am not sure but if I remember well there was some
>>> opinions that the new Kepler will be about
>>> 5x times faster (maybe not than GTX680 which is K104 based
>>> but than fermi based GTX580 which is also not true)
>>>
>>> Is there problem, that the Amber code is still not fully
>>> optimised for K20 and the actual patch 14 just allowed
>>> to use Amber on these new generation GPUs but it will
>>> need some more code improvements in order to use all
>>> the advantages of the new Kepler architecture ?
>>>
>>>
>>> Best wishes,
>>>
>>> Marek
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Dne Tue, 19 Feb 2013 17:40:12 +0100 filip fratev
>>><filipfratev.yahoo.com>
>>> napsal/-a:
>>>
>>>> Hi Ross and all,
>>>>
>>>> After a lot of rumors the GTX Titan card was
>>>> released today. For the first time on any consumer-level NVIDIA card,
>>>> double precision (FP64)
>>>> performance is uncapped. That means 1/3 FP32 performance, or
>>>> roughly 1.3TFLOPS theoretical FP64 performance. Thus this card is very
>>>> similar
>>>> (same for Amber use) to Tesla K20x, but costs 1000$ and will be much
>>>> much
>>>> faster! I suppose that Titan will break the 100+ ns threshold on JAC
>>>> test with
>>>> Amber 12 and have no patience to see some test results!
>>>> All the best,
>>>> Filip
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> AMBER mailing list
>>>> AMBER.ambermd.org
>>>> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Tato zpráva byla vytvořena převratným poštovním klientem Opery:
>>> http://www.opera.com/mail/
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> AMBER mailing list
>>> AMBER.ambermd.org
>>> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> AMBER mailing list
>> AMBER.ambermd.org
>> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
>>_______________________________________________
>AMBER mailing list
>AMBER.ambermd.org
>http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
_______________________________________________
AMBER mailing list
AMBER.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
Received on Tue Feb 19 2013 - 11:00:03 PST
