Hi Guys,
here are finally the results of in factory over clocked GTX680
( EVGA GeForce GTX680 Classified ) in combination with "ASUS P9X79 PRO"
motherboard.
As one can see the increase from the reference 1006MHz to 1111MHz make just
a small difference in results (reflecting percentually more or less the
difference
in frquency ). I did not test it in Boost clock (1176MHz) and I am not
going to do it, as for the long MD runs this regime seems to me a bit
dangerous :))
Regarding the reliability of this OC version, I am fully satisfied, already
tested 2 of these in few weeks simulations.
Best wishes,
Marek
JAC_PRODUCTION_NVE - 23,558 atoms PME
-------------------------------------
1 x GTX680: | ns/day = 80.38 seconds/ns = 1074.90
JAC_PRODUCTION_NPT - 23,558 atoms PME
-------------------------------------
1 x GTX680: | ns/day = 64.59 seconds/ns = 1337.60
FACTOR_IX_PRODUCTION_NVE - 90,906 atoms PME
-------------------------------------------
1 x GTX680: | ns/day = 20.99 seconds/ns = 4115.84
FACTOR_IX_PRODUCTION_NPT - 90,906 atoms PME
-------------------------------------------
1 x GTX680: | ns/day = 16.89 seconds/ns = 5115.66
CELLULOSE_PRODUCTION_NVE - 408,609 atoms PME
--------------------------------------------
1 x GTX680: | ns/day = 4.67 seconds/ns = 18485.98
CELLULOSE_PRODUCTION_NPT - 408,609 atoms PME
--------------------------------------------
1 x GTX680: | ns/day = 3.87 seconds/ns = 22323.57
TRPCAGE_PRODUCTION - 304 atoms GB
---------------------------------
1 x GTX680: | ns/day = 774.84 seconds/ns = 111.51
2 x GTX680: N/A 3 x GTX680: N/A 4 x GTX680: N/A
MYOGLOBIN_PRODUCTION - 2,492 atoms GB
-------------------------------------
1 x GTX680: | ns/day = 166.44 seconds/ns = 519.10
NUCLEOSOME_PRODUCTION - 25,095 atoms GB
---------------------------------------
1 x GTX680: | ns/day = 2.90 seconds/ns = 29755.05
Dne Tue, 26 Feb 2013 17:14:01 +0100 Scott Le Grand <varelse2005.gmail.com>
napsal/-a:
> As an side, go run JAC NVE in SPFP mode...
>
> If you get ~75+ ns/day, you're running at 1.05+ GHz...
>
> Otherwise, something's up. And I second what Ross is saying - just sit
> back and ride Pixel's Law. In the mid-term, I think I'll get JAC to 200+
> ns/day with a couple GTX Titans once I get the time to optimize GPU to
> GPU
> communication...
>
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 5:46 PM, Ross Walker <ross.rosswalker.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Filip,
>>
>> I think you are worrying too much hear. Firstly you are referring to the
>> double precision clock rate and not the single precision clock. AMBER
>> stopped relying on the double precision side of things and switched to
>> fixed point accumulation with the release of the GTX680 and K10. Second
>> the stock single precision clock will be faster than the K20X so you can
>> expect performance to be better than the K20X. It also has more cores
>> active 'I think', don't have the specs here or internet access to check
>> right now.
>>
>> Thirdly, the boost clock. AMBER pretty much runs the entire GPU flat out
>> ALL the time. The boost clock is only useful, as with CPUs, when you are
>> only using a fraction of the cores. In the case of GPUs unless you are
>> running very small atom counts this is unlikely to happen so even if the
>> boost clock was supported it wouldn't do you any good.
>>
>> In short, I wouldn't worry about it. Let's just wait and see how it
>> truly
>> performs when the "vaporware" actually turns up.
>>
>> All the best
>> Ross
>>
>>
>> On 2/25/13 2:39 PM, "filip fratev" <filipfratev.yahoo.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Hi all,
>> >I received some tests performed. Here is the comparison between LuxMax
>> >results obtained by GTX660 under Linux and Windows, respectively:
>> >
>> >http://img22.imageshack.us/img22/1279/luxmarkubuntu1204.png
>> >http://img692.imageshack.us/img692/9647/luxmarkwin7.png
>> >
>> >According to these results the GTX660 works at 1071Mhz, thus the Boost
>> >speed and the results between Linux and Windows are similar.
>> >
>> >However, Nvidia answered me that the GTX Titan core speed under Linux
>> >will be 837MHz and about the boost technology this: "unfortunately no,
>> >boost 1.0/2.0 are only supported on windows."
>> >Personally I trust on the above tests:)
>> >If they really caped their GTX GPU's under Linux to the base clock
>> >presumably only the BIOS hack option will be possible, which is....:)
>> >
>> >Regards,
>> >Filip
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >________________________________
>> > From: Aron Broom <broomsday.gmail.com>
>> >To: filip fratev <filipfratev.yahoo.com>; AMBER Mailing List
>> ><amber.ambermd.org>
>> >Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2013 10:12 PM
>> >Subject: Re: [AMBER] GTX Titan was finally released
>> >
>> >Just as another note, I checked out the AMBER output from running on a
>> >GTX570,
>> >
>> >|------------------- GPU DEVICE INFO --------------------
>> >|
>> >| CUDA Capable Devices Detected: 1
>> >| CUDA Device ID in use: 0
>> >| CUDA Device Name: GeForce GTX 570
>> >| CUDA Device Global Mem Size: 1279 MB
>> >| CUDA Device Num Multiprocessors: 15
>> >| CUDA Device Core Freq: 1.46 GHz
>> >|
>> >|--------------------------------------------------------
>> >
>> >So in that case the Core Freq reported is indeed the correct one, even
>> >though the GTX570 has two lower clock speeds it runs at depending on
>> load
>> >(810 MHz, and 101 MHz)
>> >
>> >I know with the 500 series, the available nVidia tools for linux will
>> >least
>> >allow you to set the device to maintain the highest clock speeds
>> >regardless
>> >of load. I have NOT done that in the above case, but if such a thing
>> is
>> >possible for the 600 series, it might be worth looking at. Sadly the
>> tool
>> >is only easily usable if you have a display connected although if you
>> >google "Axel Kohlmeyer" and go to his homepage there are some
>> suggestions
>> >on installing these tools on a typical server where you can fake a
>> >display.
>> >
>> >~Aron
>> >
>> >On Sat, Feb 23, 2013 at 2:33 PM, filip fratev <filipfratev.yahoo.com>
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> Hi Ross, Aron and all,
>> >> Thanks for your detail answers!!
>> >>
>> >> So, it seems that nobody know whether Nvidia
>> >> support the boost speed even on GTX680. Moreover, because the core
>> >>speed is
>> >> wrongly (I hope) printed as in the case of Amber 12 as well in all
>> >> benchmark
>> >> applications, we can see the difference only if compare the GTX680 to
>> >>K10
>> >> (1
>> >> GPU) where we can see 37% performance increase (JAC), which can comes
>> >>only
>> >> from the
>> >> core/memory clock.
>> >>
>> >> Ross, please ask Nvidia about these issues.
>> >> I've already asked them but don't believe that will receive any
>> adequate
>> >> answer.
>> >> I also asked several users but nobody knows and they told me that
>> Nvidia
>> >> never
>> >> said something about their Boost technology under Linux.
>> >> Thus, at this point I think that we can trust
>> >> only to your information.
>> >>
>> >> Regards,
>> >> Filip
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> ________________________________
>> >> From: Ross Walker <ross.rosswalker.co.uk>
>> >> To: filip fratev <filipfratev.yahoo.com>; AMBER Mailing List <
>> >> amber.ambermd.org>
>> >> Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2013 6:45 AM
>> >> Subject: Re: [AMBER] GTX Titan was finally released
>> >>
>> >> Hi Filip,
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> >As you know I plan to purchase few GTX Titans:)
>> >> >but I am not sure actually at what speed they will run: 836, 876 or
>> 993
>> >> >Mhz?
>> >> >It seems that by default (80C target) the Titan
>> >> >runs under Windows only on the maximal core speed (around 1Ghz) not
>> the
>> >> >boost
>> >> >one. It goes back to 836 only if the temperature rises above 80C but
>> >>with
>> >> >100%
>> >> >fan speed this looks almost impossible. At least this is what I saw
>> >>from
>> >> >the
>> >> >reviews.
>> >>
>> >> No idea since I am still waiting for NVIDIA to actually send me a
>> >> development card to try this with. I guess the Titan's will be
>> vaporware
>> >> for a while. I am intrigued to know about how the clock speed will
>> work
>> >> and I am waiting for NVIDIA engineering to get back to me with a
>> >> definitive answer. Note the Titan can also be run in two modes from
>> >>what I
>> >> gather. One with the DP cores turned down and the SP cores clocked up
>> >> (Gaming mode) and one where it turns on all the DP cores and clocks
>> down
>> >> the single precision (CUDA mode). Note AMBER was retooled for the
>> GK104
>> >> chip to not use double precision anymore. It uses a combination of
>> >>single
>> >> and fixed precision which we worked very hard to tune to match/better
>> >>the
>> >> SPDP accuracy. Thus it is entirely possible that one will actually
>> want
>> >>to
>> >> run the Titan cards in gaming mode when running AMBER. Of course
>> this is
>> >> entirely speculation until I lay my hands on one. The thermal window
>> >>also
>> >> has potential issues for 4 GPU boxes but there may end up being a
>> hack
>> >>to
>> >> disable the down clocking and allow temps over 80C. Note most cards I
>> >>have
>> >> (GTX680s) run around 90C right now. SDSC runs it's machine room at
>> 85F
>> >>in
>> >> order to save power - since disks and CPUs don't care if the room is
>> 85F
>> >> vs 60F. This might be a different story if the GPUs throttle based on
>> >> temperature but I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >I was also horrified to see that many GTX680
>> >> >(and other cards) users complain that under Linux their cards run at
>> >>only
>> >> >about
>> >> >700Mhz core speed instead of 1Ghz. What is your experience with GTX
>> >>680?
>> >> >I was also wondering whether the GTX680 use the
>> >> >boost clock during the Amber calculations or the just the base one?
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >> I think this is just speculation. When you run AMBER with a GTX680 it
>> >> prints the following:
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> |------------------- GPU DEVICE INFO --------------------
>> >> |
>> >> | CUDA Capable Devices Detected: 1
>> >> | CUDA Device ID in use: 0
>> >> | CUDA Device Name: GeForce GTX 680
>> >> | CUDA Device Global Mem Size: 2047 MB
>> >> | CUDA Device Num Multiprocessors: 8
>> >> | CUDA Device Core Freq: 0.71 GHz
>> >> |
>> >> |--------------------------------------------------------
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> But this is a query that occurs at the very beginning of a run before
>> >>any
>> >> CUDA kernels have been run. I believe that when unloaded the 680 in
>> >>Linux
>> >> clocks down to 705MHz to save power. When you stress it hard it
>> >> automatically clocks up the frequency. I am not sure if there is way
>> to
>> >> check this though while the card is under load. Certainly the
>> >>performance
>> >> we see would be what it is if the clock speed was only 705MHz. I am
>> >>asking
>> >> NVIDIA engineering to clarify though.
>> >>
>> >> >Finally, what is the performance difference of
>> >> >pmemdCuda under Linux and Cygwin?
>> >>
>> >> Never tried and I very much doubt you'll be able to get pmemd.cuda
>> >> compiled under cygwin. Cygwin emulates things through the cygwin dll
>> and
>> >> so you'd need a cygwin compatible version of the nvidia compiler I'd
>> >> expect.
>> >>
>> >> Note have a native Windows version of pmemd.cuda but never released
>> the
>> >> binary since the performance is about half that of what it is on
>> Linux
>> >>due
>> >> to a bug in cuda 4.2 under windows that limited performance. cuda 3
>> >>showed
>> >> good performance under windows but you can't use that with AMBER 12.
>> We
>> >> haven't had time to get back to looking at this with cuda 5
>> >>unfortunately.
>> >>
>> >> All the best
>> >> Ross
>> >>
>> >> /\
>> >> \/
>> >> |\oss Walker
>> >>
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------
>> >> | Assistant Research Professor |
>> >> | San Diego Supercomputer Center |
>> >> | Adjunct Assistant Professor |
>> >> | Dept. of Chemistry and Biochemistry |
>> >> | University of California San Diego |
>> >> | NVIDIA Fellow |
>> >> | http://www.rosswalker.co.uk | http://www.wmd-lab.org |
>> >> | Tel: +1 858 822 0854 | EMail:- ross.rosswalker.co.uk |
>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------
>> >>
>> >> Note: Electronic Mail is not secure, has no guarantee of delivery,
>> may
>> >>not
>> >> be read every day, and should not be used for urgent or sensitive
>> >>issues.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> 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
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >--
>> >Aron Broom M.Sc
>> >PhD Student
>> >Department of Chemistry
>> >University of Waterloo
>> >_______________________________________________
>> >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
>
> __________ Informace od ESET NOD32 Antivirus, verze databaze 8053
> (20130226) __________
>
> Tuto zpravu proveril ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.cz
>
>
>
--
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
Received on Wed Feb 27 2013 - 11:00:03 PST
