Ahhhh ok! I will recompile in that case. :(
On 1 June 2013 21:32, Marek Maly <marek.maly.ujep.cz> wrote:
> If you just "apply" patches using just configure command/script,
> only source code is edited. You need then recompile
> to obtain updated binary files "which are doing the real work".
>
> M.
>
>
>
> Dne Sat, 01 Jun 2013 22:18:34 +0200 ET <sketchfoot.gmail.com> napsal/-a:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Just saw your messages and am already half way through running the
> > benchmarks again with driver version 319.23 and latest AMBER patches
> > applied. I did not recompile. I know Mareck suggested that recompilation
> > was the preferred route, but could one of the developers definitively
> > confirm whether this is necessary as I would prefer to avoid this if
> > possible.
> >
> > The additional questions I had are:
> >
> > 1) Does anyone know the reason for the gaps in the mdout files? Is this
> > because both GPUs are running at the same time and there is some kind of
> > sync error in writing to the mdout file?
> >
> > 2) Are there any issues with running the cards simultaneously in PCIe
> > v2.0
> > slots operating at x16? There is no min requirement for PCIe v 3.0?
> >
> >
> > br,
> > g
> >
> >
> > On 1 June 2013 20:34, Marek Maly <marek.maly.ujep.cz> wrote:
> >
> >> Sorry,
> >>
> >> regarding that double precision mode it perhaps mean to recompile
> >> GPU amber part with "DPDP" configure setting. Am I right ?
> >>
> >> M.
> >>
> >>
> >> Dne Sat, 01 Jun 2013 21:26:42 +0200 Marek Maly <marek.maly.ujep.cz>
> >> napsal/-a:
> >>
> >> > Hi Scott,
> >> >
> >> > please how can I activate double-precision mode ?
> >> >
> >> > It is something which could be enabled using nvidia-smi ?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Regarding to this your comment:
> >> >
> >> > --------
> >> > The only thing that's funny about these tests is how little they
> >> diverge.
> >> > So I am *hoping* this might be a bug in cuFFT rather than a GTX Titan
> >> HW
> >> > ------
> >> >
> >> > So you mean that the problem here might be in CUDA 5.0 implementation
> >> of
> >> > cuFFT ? If yes, it means that there is some kind of "incompatibility"
> >> > just
> >> > in case of Titanes as with GTX 580, GTX 680 I have obtained perfect
> >> > reproducibility
> >> > in all tests (see my older posts in this thread).
> >> >
> >> > So perhaps would be good idea to try with CUDA 5.5 where maybe cuFFT
> >> will
> >> > be
> >> > more "compatible" also with the new Titanes (or also GTX 780s).
> >> >
> >> > I will do this this experiment, but before I would like to check
> >> > if the bugfix 18 will solve at least some of reported issues or not
> >> > (still using CUDA 5.0 which is also the latest version officially
> >> > compatible with
> >> > Amber code as reported here http://ambermd.org/gpus/ )
> >> >
> >> > M.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > The only thing that's funny about these tests is how little they
> >> diverge.
> >> > So I am *hoping* this might be a bug in cuFFT rather than a GTX Titan
> >> HW
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Dne Sat, 01 Jun 2013 20:46:29 +0200 Scott Le Grand
> >> > <varelse2005.gmail.com>
> >> > napsal/-a:
> >> >
> >> >> The acid test is running on a K20. If K20 is OK, then I really think
> >> >> (99.5%) Titan is hosed...
> >> >>
> >> >> If K20 shows the same irreproducible behavior, my life gets a whole
> >> lot
> >> >> more interesting...
> >> >>
> >> >> But along those lines, could you try activating double-precision mode
> >> >> and
> >> >> retesting? That ought to clock the thing down significantly, and if
> >> it
> >> >> suddenly runs reproducibly, then 99.5% this is a Titan HW issue...
> >> >>
> >> >> Scott
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 11:26 AM, ET <sketchfoot.gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> Hi,
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I've put the graphics card into a machine with the working GTX titan
> >> >>> that I
> >> >>> mentioned earlier.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> The Nvidia driver version is: 133.30
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Amber version is:
> >> >>> AmberTools version 13.03
> >> >>> Amber version 12.16
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I ran 50k steps with the amber benchmark using ig=43689 on both
> >> cards.
> >> >>> For
> >> >>> the purpose of discriminating between them, the card I believe
> >> (fingers
> >> >>> crossed) is working is called GPU-00_TeaNCake, whilst the other one
> >> is
> >> >>> called GPU-01_008.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> *When I run the tests on GPU-01_008:*
> >> >>>
> >> >>> 1) All the tests (across 2x repeats) finish apart from the
> >> following
> >> >>> which
> >> >>> have the errors listed:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --------------------------------------------
> >> >>> CELLULOSE_PRODUCTION_NVE - 408,609 atoms PME
> >> >>> Error: unspecified launch failure launching kernel kNLSkinTest
> >> >>> cudaFree GpuBuffer::Deallocate failed unspecified launch failure
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --------------------------------------------
> >> >>> CELLULOSE_PRODUCTION_NPT - 408,609 atoms PME
> >> >>> cudaMemcpy GpuBuffer::Download failed unspecified launch failure
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --------------------------------------------
> >> >>> CELLULOSE_PRODUCTION_NVE - 408,609 atoms PME
> >> >>> Error: unspecified launch failure launching kernel kNLSkinTest
> >> >>> cudaFree GpuBuffer::Deallocate failed unspecified launch failure
> >> >>>
> >> >>> --------------------------------------------
> >> >>> CELLULOSE_PRODUCTION_NPT - 408,609 atoms PME
> >> >>> cudaMemcpy GpuBuffer::Download failed unspecified launch failure
> >> >>> grep: mdinfo.1GTX680: No such file or directory
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> 2) The sdiff logs indicate that reproducibility across the two
> >> repeats
> >> >>> is
> >> >>> as follows:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> *GB_myoglobin: *Reproducible across 50k steps
> >> >>> *GB_nucleosome:* Reproducible till step 7400
> >> >>> *GB_TRPCage:* Reproducible across 50k steps
> >> >>>
> >> >>> *PME_JAC_production_NVE: *No reproducibility shown from step 1,000
> >> >>> onwards
> >> >>> *PME_JAC_production_NPT*: Reproducible till step 1,000. Also
> >> outfile
> >> >>> is
> >> >>> not written properly - blank gaps appear where something should have
> >> >>> been
> >> >>> written
> >> >>>
> >> >>> *PME_FactorIX_production_NVE:* Reproducible across 50k steps
> >> >>> *PME_FactorIX_production_NPT:* Reproducible across 50k steps
> >> >>>
> >> >>> *PME_Cellulose_production_NVE:* Failure means that both runs do not
> >> >>> finish
> >> >>> (see point1)
> >> >>> *PME_Cellulose_production_NPT: *Failure means that both runs do not
> >> >>> finish
> >> >>> (see point1)
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >>
> #######################################################################################
> >> >>>
> >> >>> *When I run the tests on * *GPU-00_TeaNCake:*
> >> >>> *
> >> >>> *
> >> >>> 1) All the tests (across 2x repeats) finish apart from the
> >> following
> >> >>> which
> >> >>> have the errors listed:
> >> >>> -------------------------------------
> >> >>> JAC_PRODUCTION_NPT - 23,558 atoms PME
> >> >>> PMEMD Terminated Abnormally!
> >> >>> -------------------------------------
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> 2) The sdiff logs indicate that reproducibility across the two
> >> repeats
> >> >>> is
> >> >>> as follows:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> *GB_myoglobin:* Reproducible across 50k steps
> >> >>> *GB_nucleosome:* Reproducible across 50k steps
> >> >>> *GB_TRPCage:* Reproducible across 50k steps
> >> >>>
> >> >>> *PME_JAC_production_NVE:* No reproducibility shown from step 10,000
> >> >>> onwards
> >> >>> *PME_JAC_production_NPT: * No reproducibility shown from step 10,000
> >> >>> onwards. Also outfile is not written properly - blank gaps appear
> >> where
> >> >>> something should have been written. Repeat 2 Crashes with error
> >> noted
> >> >>> in 1.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> *PME_FactorIX_production_NVE:* No reproducibility shown from step
> >> 9,000
> >> >>> onwards
> >> >>> *PME_FactorIX_production_NPT: *Reproducible across 50k steps
> >> >>>
> >> >>> *PME_Cellulose_production_NVE: *No reproducibility shown from step
> >> >>> 5,000
> >> >>> onwards
> >> >>> *PME_Cellulose_production_NPT: ** *No reproducibility shown from
> >> step
> >> >>> 29,000 onwards. Also outfile is not written properly - blank gaps
> >> >>> appear
> >> >>> where something should have been written.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Out files and sdiff files are included as attatchments
> >> >>>
> >> >>> #################################################
> >> >>>
> >> >>> So I'm going to update my nvidia driver to the latest version and
> >> patch
> >> >>> amber to the latest version and rerun the tests to see if there is
> >> any
> >> >>> improvement. Could someone let me know if it is necessary to
> >> recompile
> >> >>> any
> >> >>> or all of AMBER after applying the bugfixes?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Additionally, I'm going to run memory tests and heaven benchmarks on
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> cards to check whether they are faulty or not.
> >> >>>
> >> >>> I'm thinking that there is a mix of hardware error/configuration
> >> (esp
> >> >>> in
> >> >>> the case of GPU-01_008) and amber software error in this situation.
> >> >>> What do
> >> >>> you guys think?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> Also am I right in thinking (from what Scott was saying) that all
> >> the
> >> >>> benchmarks should be reproducible across 50k steps but begin to
> >> diverge
> >> >>> at
> >> >>> around 100K steps? Is there any difference from in setting *ig *to
> >> an
> >> >>> explicit number to removing it from the mdin file?
> >> >>>
> >> >>> br,
> >> >>> g
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>>
> >> >>> On 31 May 2013 23:45, ET <sketchfoot.gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>>
> >> >>> > I don't need sysadmins, but sysadmins need me as it gives purpose
> >> to
> >> >>> their
> >> >>> > bureaucratic existence. A encountered evil if working in an
> >> >>> institution
> >> >>> or
> >> >>> > comapny IMO. Good science and indiviguality being sacrificed for
> >> >>> > standardisation and mediocrity in the intrerests of maintaing a
> >> >>> system
> >> >>> that
> >> >>> > focusses on maintaining the system and not the objective.
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> > You need root to move fwd on these things, unfortunately. and ppl
> >> >>> with
> >> >>> > root are kinda like your parents when you try to borrow money from
> >> >>> them .
> >> >>> > age 12 :D
> >> >>> > On May 31, 2013 9:34 PM, "Marek Maly" <marek.maly.ujep.cz> wrote:
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> Sorry why do you need sysadmins :)) ?
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> BTW here is the most recent driver:
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> http://www.nvidia.com/object/linux-display-amd64-319.23-driver.html
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> I do not remember anything easier than is to install driver
> >> >>> (especially
> >> >>> >> in case of binary (*.run) installer) :))
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> M.
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> Dne Fri, 31 May 2013 22:02:34 +0200 ET <sketchfoot.gmail.com>
> >> >>> napsal/-a:
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >> > Yup. I know. I replaced a 680 and the everknowing sysadmins are
> >> >>> >> reluctant
> >> >>> >> > to install drivers not in the repositoery as they are lame. :(
> >> >>> >> > On May 31, 2013 7:14 PM, "Marek Maly" <marek.maly.ujep.cz>
> >> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> As I already wrote you,
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> the first driver which properly/officially supports Titans,
> >> >>> should be
> >> >>> >> >> 313.26 .
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> Anyway I am curious mainly about your 100K repetitive tests
> >> with
> >> >>> >> >> your Titan SC card. Especially in case of these tests (
> >> JAC_NVE,
> >> >>> >> JAC_NPT
> >> >>> >> >> and CELLULOSE_NVE ) where
> >> >>> >> >> my Titans SC randomly failed or succeeded. In FACTOR_IX_NVE,
> >> >>> >> >> FACTOR_IX_NPT
> >> >>> >> >> tests both
> >> >>> >> >> my cards are perfectly stable (independently from drv.
> >> version)
> >> >>> and
> >> >>> >> also
> >> >>> >> >> the runs
> >> >>> >> >> are perfectly or almost perfectly reproducible.
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> Also if your test will crash please report the eventual errs.
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> To this moment I have this actual library of errs on my
> >> Titans SC
> >> >>> GPUs.
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> #1 ERR writtent in mdout:
> >> >>> >> >> ------
> >> >>> >> >> | ERROR: max pairlist cutoff must be less than unit cell max
> >> >>> sphere
> >> >>> >> >> radius!
> >> >>> >> >> ------
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> #2 no ERR writtent in mdout, ERR written in standard output
> >> >>> (nohup.out)
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> ----
> >> >>> >> >> Error: unspecified launch failure launching kernel kNLSkinTest
> >> >>> >> >> cudaFree GpuBuffer::Deallocate failed unspecified launch
> >> failure
> >> >>> >> >> ----
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> #3 no ERR writtent in mdout, ERR written in standard output
> >> >>> (nohup.out)
> >> >>> >> >> ----
> >> >>> >> >> cudaMemcpy GpuBuffer::Download failed unspecified launch
> >> failure
> >> >>> >> >> ----
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> Another question, regarding your Titan SC, it is also EVGA as
> >> in
> >> >>> my
> >> >>> >> case
> >> >>> >> >> or it is another producer ?
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> Thanks,
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> M.
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> Dne Fri, 31 May 2013 19:17:03 +0200 ET <sketchfoot.gmail.com>
> >> >>> >> napsal/-a:
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> > Well, this is interesting...
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> > I ran 50k steps on the Titan on the other machine with
> >> driver
> >> >>> 310.44
> >> >>> >> >> and
> >> >>> >> >> > it
> >> >>> >> >> > passed all the GB steps. i.e totally identical results over
> >> two
> >> >>> >> >> repeats.
> >> >>> >> >> > However, it failed all the PME tests after step 1000. I'm
> >> going
> >> >>> to
> >> >>> >> > update
> >> >>> >> >> > the driver and test it again.
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> > Files included as attachments.
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> > br,
> >> >>> >> >> > g
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> > On 31 May 2013 16:40, Marek Maly <marek.maly.ujep.cz>
> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> One more thing,
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> can you please check under which frequency is running that
> >> >>> your
> >> >>> >> >> titan ?
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> As the base frequency of normal Titans is 837MHz and the
> >> Boost
> >> >>> one
> >> >>> >> is
> >> >>> >> >> >> 876MHz I
> >> >>> >> >> >> assume that yor GPU is running automatically also under
> >> it's
> >> >>> boot
> >> >>> >> >> >> frequency (876MHz).
> >> >>> >> >> >> You can find this information e.g. in Amber mdout file.
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> You also mentioned some crashes in your previous email.
> >> Your
> >> >>> ERRs
> >> >>> >> >> were
> >> >>> >> >> >> something like those here:
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> #1 ERR writtent in mdout:
> >> >>> >> >> >> ------
> >> >>> >> >> >> | ERROR: max pairlist cutoff must be less than unit cell
> >> max
> >> >>> >> sphere
> >> >>> >> >> >> radius!
> >> >>> >> >> >> ------
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> #2 no ERR writtent in mdout, ERR written in standard output
> >> >>> >> >> (nohup.out)
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> ----
> >> >>> >> >> >> Error: unspecified launch failure launching kernel
> >> kNLSkinTest
> >> >>> >> >> >> cudaFree GpuBuffer::Deallocate failed unspecified launch
> >> >>> failure
> >> >>> >> >> >> ----
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> #3 no ERR writtent in mdout, ERR written in standard output
> >> >>> >> >> (nohup.out)
> >> >>> >> >> >> ----
> >> >>> >> >> >> cudaMemcpy GpuBuffer::Download failed unspecified launch
> >> >>> failure
> >> >>> >> >> >> ----
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> or you obtained some new/additional errs ?
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> M.
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> Dne Fri, 31 May 2013 17:30:57 +0200 filip fratev
> >> >>> >> >> <filipfratev.yahoo.com
> >> >>> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> napsal/-a:
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> > Hi,
> >> >>> >> >> >> > This is what I obtained for 50K tests and "normal"
> >> GTXTitan:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > run1:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > A V E R A G E S O V E R 50 S T E P S
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > NSTEP = 50000 TIME(PS) = 120.020 TEMP(K) =
> >> >>> 299.87
> >> >>> >> >> PRESS
> >> >>> >> >> >> > = 0.0
> >> >>> >> >> >> > Etot = -443237.1079 EKtot = 257679.9750
> EPtot
> >> >>> =
> >> >>> >> >> >> > -700917.0829
> >> >>> >> >> >> > BOND = 20193.1856 ANGLE = 53517.5432
> >> >>> DIHED =
> >> >>> >> >> >> > 23575.4648
> >> >>> >> >> >> > 1-4 NB = 21759.5524 1-4 EEL = 742552.5939
> >> >>> VDWAALS =
> >> >>> >> >> >> > 96286.7714
> >> >>> >> >> >> > EELEC = -1658802.1941 EHBOND = 0.0000
> >> >>> RESTRAINT =
> >> >>> >> >> >> > 0.0000
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > R M S F L U C T U A T I O N S
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > NSTEP = 50000 TIME(PS) = 120.020 TEMP(K) =
> >> >>> 0.33
> >> >>> >> >> PRESS
> >> >>> >> >> >> > = 0.0
> >> >>> >> >> >> > Etot = 11.2784 EKtot = 284.8999
> >> >>> EPtot =
> >> >>> >> >> >> > 289.0773
> >> >>> >> >> >> > BOND = 136.3417 ANGLE = 214.0054
> >> >>> DIHED =
> >> >>> >> >> >> > 59.4893
> >> >>> >> >> >> > 1-4 NB = 58.5891 1-4 EEL = 330.5400
> >> >>> VDWAALS =
> >> >>> >> >> >> > 559.2079
> >> >>> >> >> >> > EELEC = 743.8771 EHBOND = 0.0000
> >> >>> RESTRAINT =
> >> >>> >> >> >> > 0.0000
> >> >>> >> >> >> > |E(PBS) = 21.8119
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > run2:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > A V E R A G E S O V E R 50 S T E P S
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > NSTEP = 50000 TIME(PS) = 120.020 TEMP(K) =
> >> >>> 299.89
> >> >>> >> >> PRESS
> >> >>> >> >> >> > = 0.0
> >> >>> >> >> >> > Etot = -443240.0999 EKtot = 257700.0950
> >> >>> EPtot =
> >> >>> >> >> >> > -700940.1949
> >> >>> >> >> >> > BOND = 20241.9174 ANGLE = 53644.6694
> >> >>> DIHED =
> >> >>> >> >> >> > 23541.3737
> >> >>> >> >> >> > 1-4 NB = 21803.1898 1-4 EEL = 742754.2254
> >> >>> VDWAALS =
> >> >>> >> >> >> > 96298.8308
> >> >>> >> >> >> > EELEC = -1659224.4013 EHBOND = 0.0000
> >> >>> RESTRAINT =
> >> >>> >> >> >> > 0.0000
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > R M S F L U C T U A T I O N S
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > NSTEP = 50000 TIME(PS) = 120.020 TEMP(K) =
> >> >>> 0.41
> >> >>> >> >> PRESS
> >> >>> >> >> >> > = 0.0
> >> >>> >> >> >> > Etot = 10.7633 EKtot = 348.2819
> >> >>> EPtot =
> >> >>> >> >> >> > 353.9918
> >> >>> >> >> >> > BOND = 106.5314 ANGLE = 196.7052
> >> >>> DIHED =
> >> >>> >> >> >> > 69.7476
> >> >>> >> >> >> > 1-4 NB = 60.3435 1-4 EEL = 400.7466
> >> >>> VDWAALS =
> >> >>> >> >> >> > 462.7763
> >> >>> >> >> >> > EELEC = 651.9857 EHBOND = 0.0000
> >> >>> RESTRAINT =
> >> >>> >> >> >> > 0.0000
> >> >>> >> >> >> > |E(PBS) = 17.0642
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > ________________________________
> >> >>> >> >> >> > From: Marek Maly <marek.maly.ujep.cz>
> >> >>> >> >> >> > To: AMBER Mailing List <amber.ambermd.org>
> >> >>> >> >> >> > Sent: Friday, May 31, 2013 3:34 PM
> >> >>> >> >> >> > Subject: Re: [AMBER] experiences with EVGA GTX TITAN
> >> >>> Superclocked
> >> >>> >> -
> >> >>> >> >> >> > memtestG80 - UNDERclocking in Linux ?
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > Hi here are my 100K results for driver 313.30 (and still
> >> >>> Cuda
> >> >>> >> 5.0).
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > The results are rather similar to those obtained
> >> >>> >> >> >> > under my original driver 319.17 (see the first table
> >> >>> >> >> >> > which I sent in this thread).
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > M.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> > Dne Fri, 31 May 2013 12:29:59 +0200 Marek Maly <
> >> >>> >> marek.maly.ujep.cz>
> >> >>> >> >> >> > napsal/-a:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> Hi,
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> please try to run at lest 100K tests twice to verify
> >> exact
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> reproducibility
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> of the results on the given card. If you find in any
> >> mdin
> >> >>> file
> >> >>> >> >> ig=-1
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> just
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> delete it to ensure that you are using the identical
> >> random
> >> >>> seed
> >> >>> >> >> for
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> both
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> runs. You can eventually omit NUCLEOSOME test
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> as it is too much time consuming.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> Driver 310.44 ?????
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> As far as I know the proper support for titans is from
> >> >>> version
> >> >>> >> > 313.26
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> see e.g. here :
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>>
> >>
> http://www.geeks3d.com/20130306/nvidia-releases-r313-26-for-linux-with-gtx-titan-support/
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> BTW: On my site downgrade to drv. 313.30 did not solved
> >> the
> >> >>> >> >> >> situation, I
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> will post
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> my results soon here.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> M.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >> Dne Fri, 31 May 2013 12:21:21 +0200 ET
> >> >>> <sketchfoot.gmail.com>
> >> >>> >> >> >> napsal/-a:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> ps. I have another install of amber on another computer
> >> >>> with a
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> different
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> Titan and different Driver Version: 310.44.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> In the interests of thrashing the proverbial horse,
> >> I'll
> >> >>> run
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> benchmark
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> for 50k steps. :P
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> br,
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> g
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> On 31 May 2013 11:17, ET <sketchfoot.gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>> Hi, I just ran the Amber benchmark for the default
> >> (10000
> >> >>> >> steps)
> >> >>> >> >> >> on my
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>> Titan.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>> Using sdiff -sB showed that the two runs were
> >> completely
> >> >>> >> > identical.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>> I've
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>> attached compressed files of the mdout & diff files.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>> br,
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>> g
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>> On 30 May 2013 23:41, Marek Maly <marek.maly.ujep.cz>
> >> >>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> OK, let's see. The eventual downclocking I see as the
> >> >>> very
> >> >>> >> last
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> possibility
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> (if I don't decide for RMAing). But now still some
> >> other
> >> >>> >> >> >> experiments
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> are
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> available :))
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> I just started 100K tests under 313.30 driver. For
> >> today
> >> >>> good
> >> >>> >> >> >> night
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> ...
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> M.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> Dne Fri, 31 May 2013 00:45:49 +0200 Scott Le Grand
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> <varelse2005.gmail.com
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> napsal/-a:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> > It will be very interesting if this behavior
> >> persists
> >> >>> after
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> downclocking.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> > But right now, Titan 0 *looks* hosed and Titan 1
> >> >>> *looks*
> >> >>> >> like
> >> >>> >> > it
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> needs
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> > downclocking...
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> > On May 30, 2013 3:20 PM, "Marek Maly"
> >> >>> <marek.maly.ujep.cz
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> Hi all,
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> here are my results from the 500K steps 2 x
> >> repeated
> >> >>> >> > benchmarks
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> under 319.23 driver and still Cuda 5.0 (see the
> >> >>> attached
> >> >>> >> >> table
> >> >>> >> >> >> ).
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> It is hard to say if the results are better or
> >> worse
> >> >>> than
> >> >>> >> in
> >> >>> >> > my
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> previous 100K test under driver 319.17.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> While results from Cellulose test were improved
> >> and
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> >> > TITAN_1
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> card
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> even
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> successfully finished all 500K steps moreover with
> >> >>> exactly
> >> >>> >> >> the
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> same
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> final
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> energy !
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> (TITAN_0 at least finished more than 100K steps
> >> and
> >> >>> in
> >> >>> >> >> RUN_01
> >> >>> >> >> >> even
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> more
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> than 400K steps)
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> In JAC_NPT test no GPU was able to finish at least
> >> >>> 100K
> >> >>> >> >> steps
> >> >>> >> >> >> and
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> the
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> results from JAC_NVE
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> test are also not too much convincing.
> >> FACTOR_IX_NVE
> >> >>> and
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> FACTOR_IX_NPT
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> were successfully
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> finished with 100% reproducibility in
> >> FACTOR_IX_NPT
> >> >>> case
> >> >>> >> >> (on
> >> >>> >> >> >> both
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> cards)
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> and almost
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> 100% reproducibility in case of FACTOR_IX_NVE
> >> (again
> >> >>> 100%
> >> >>> >> in
> >> >>> >> >> >> case
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> of
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> TITAN_1). TRPCAGE, MYOGLOBIN
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> again finished without any problem with 100%
> >> >>> >> >> reproducibility.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> NUCLEOSOME
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> test was not done
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> this time due to high time requirements. If you
> >> find
> >> >>> in
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> >> >> >> table
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> positive
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> number finishing with
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> K (which means "thousands") it means the last
> >> number
> >> >>> of
> >> >>> >> step
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> written in
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> mdout before crash.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> Below are all the 3 types of detected errs with
> >> >>> relevant
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> systems/rounds
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> where the given err
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> appeared.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> Now I will try just 100K tests under ETs favourite
> >> >>> driver
> >> >>> >> >> >> version
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> 313.30
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> :)) and then
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> I will eventually try to experiment with cuda 5.5
> >> >>> which I
> >> >>> >> >> >> already
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> downloaded from the
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> cuda zone ( I had to become cuda developer for
> >> this
> >> >>> :)) )
> >> >>> >> >> BTW
> >> >>> >> >> >> ET
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> thanks
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> for the frequency info !
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> and I am still ( perhaps not alone :)) ) very
> >> curious
> >> >>> about
> >> >>> >> >> >> your 2
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> x
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> repeated Amber benchmark tests with superclocked
> >> >>> Titan.
> >> >>> >> >> Indeed
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> that
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> I
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> am
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> very curious also about that Ross "hot" patch.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> M.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> ERRORS DETECTED DURING THE 500K steps tests with
> >> >>> driver
> >> >>> >> >> 319.23
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> #1 ERR writtent in mdout:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> ------
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> | ERROR: max pairlist cutoff must be less than
> >> unit
> >> >>> cell
> >> >>> >> >> max
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> sphere
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> radius!
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> ------
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> TITAN_0 ROUND_1 JAC_NPT (at least 5000 steps
> >> >>> successfully
> >> >>> >> > done
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> before
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> crash)
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> TITAN_0 ROUND_2 JAC_NPT (at least 8000 steps
> >> >>> successfully
> >> >>> >> > done
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> before
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> crash)
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> #2 no ERR writtent in mdout, ERR written in
> >> standard
> >> >>> output
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> (nohup.out)
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> ----
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> Error: unspecified launch failure launching kernel
> >> >>> >> >> kNLSkinTest
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> cudaFree GpuBuffer::Deallocate failed unspecified
> >> >>> launch
> >> >>> >> >> >> failure
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> ----
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> TITAN_0 ROUND_1 CELLULOSE_NVE (at least 437 000
> >> steps
> >> >>> >> >> >> successfully
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> done
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> before crash)
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> TITAN_0 ROUND_2 JAC_NVE (at least 162 000 steps
> >> >>> >> >> successfully
> >> >>> >> >> >> done
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> before
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> crash)
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> TITAN_0 ROUND_2 CELLULOSE_NVE (at least 117 000
> >> steps
> >> >>> >> >> >> successfully
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> done
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> before crash)
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> TITAN_1 ROUND_1 JAC_NVE (at least 119 000 steps
> >> >>> >> >> successfully
> >> >>> >> >> >> done
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> before
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> crash)
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> TITAN_1 ROUND_2 JAC_NVE (at least 43 000 steps
> >> >>> >> successfully
> >> >>> >> >> >> done
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> before
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> crash)
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> #3 no ERR writtent in mdout, ERR written in
> >> standard
> >> >>> output
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> (nohup.out)
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> ----
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> cudaMemcpy GpuBuffer::Download failed unspecified
> >> >>> launch
> >> >>> >> >> >> failure
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> ----
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> TITAN_1 ROUND_1 JAC_NPT (at least 77 000 steps
> >> >>> >> successfully
> >> >>> >> >> >> done
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> before
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> crash)
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> TITAN_1 ROUND_2 JAC_NPT (at least 58 000 steps
> >> >>> >> successfully
> >> >>> >> >> >> done
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> before
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> crash)
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> Dne Thu, 30 May 2013 21:27:17 +0200 Scott Le Grand
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> <varelse2005.gmail.com>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> napsal/-a:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >> Oops meant to send that to Jason...
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> Anyway, before we all panic, we need to get K20's
> >> >>> behavior
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> analyzed
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> here.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> If it's deterministic, this truly is a hardware
> >> >>> issue.
> >> >>> If
> >> >>> >> >> >> not,
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> then
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> it
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> gets interesting because 680 is deterministic as
> >> far
> >> >>> as
> >> >>> I
> >> >>> >> >> can
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> tell...
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> On May 30, 2013 12:24 PM, "Scott Le Grand"
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> <varelse2005.gmail.com>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> If the errors are not deterministically
> >> triggered,
> >> >>> they
> >> >>> >> >> >> probably
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> won't be
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>> fixed by the patch, alas...
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>> On May 30, 2013 12:15 PM, "Jason Swails"
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> <jason.swails.gmail.com>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>> Just a reminder to everyone based on what Ross
> >> >>> said:
> >> >>> >> >> there
> >> >>> >> >> >> is a
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>> pending
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> patch to pmemd.cuda that will be coming out
> >> >>> shortly
> >> >>> >> >> (maybe
> >> >>> >> >> >> even
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> within
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> hours). It's entirely possible that several of
> >> >>> these
> >> >>> >> > errors
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> are
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> fixed
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> by
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> this patch.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> All the best,
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> Jason
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, May 30, 2013 at 2:46 PM, filip fratev <
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> filipfratev.yahoo.com>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > I have observed the same crashes from time to
> >> >>> time.
> >> >>> I
> >> >>> >> > will
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> run
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> cellulose
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > nve for 100k and will past results here.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > All the best,
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > Filip
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > ______________________________**__
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > From: Scott Le Grand <varelse2005.gmail.com
> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > To: AMBER Mailing List <amber.ambermd.org>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > Sent: Thursday, May 30, 2013 9:01 PM
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > Subject: Re: [AMBER] experiences with EVGA
> >> GTX
> >> >>> TITAN
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> Superclocked
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> -
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > memtestG80 - UNDERclocking in Linux ?
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > Run cellulose nve for 100k iterations twice .
> >> >>> If
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> >> >> >> final
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> energies
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> don't
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > match, you have a hardware issue. No need to
> >> >>> play
> >> >>> >> with
> >> >>> >> >> >> ntpr
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> or
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> any
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> other
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > variable.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > On May 30, 2013 10:58 AM,
> >> <pavel.banas.upol.cz>
> >> >>> >> wrote:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > Dear all,
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > I would also like to share one of my
> >> >>> experience
> >> >>> with
> >> >>> >> >> >> titan
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> cards. We
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> have
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > one gtx titan card and with one system
> >> (~55k
> >> >>> atoms,
> >> >>> >> > NVT,
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> RNA+waters)
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> we
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > run
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > into same troubles you are describing. I
> >> was
> >> >>> also
> >> >>> >> >> >> playing
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> with
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> ntpr
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> to
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > figure out what is going on, step by step.
> >> I
> >> >>> >> >> understand
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> that
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> the
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> code
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> is
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > using different routines for calculation
> >> >>> >> >> >> energies+forces or
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> only
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> forces.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > The
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > simulations of other systems are perfectly
> >> >>> stable,
> >> >>> >> >> >> running
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> for
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> days
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> and
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > weeks. Only that particular system
> >> >>> systematically
> >> >>> >> >> ends
> >> >>> >> >> >> up
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> with
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> this
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > error.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > However, there was one interesting issue.
> >> When
> >> >>> I
> >> >>> set
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> ntpr=1,
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> the
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> error
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > vanished (systematically in multiple runs)
> >> and
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> simulation
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> was
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> able to
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > run for more than millions of steps (I was
> >> not
> >> >>> let
> >> >>> >> it
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> running
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> for
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> weeks
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > as
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > in the meantime I shifted that simulation
> >> to
> >> >>> other
> >> >>> >> >> card
> >> >>> >> >> >> -
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> need
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> data,
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> not
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > testing). All other setting of ntpr
> >> failed. As
> >> >>> I
> >> >>> >> read
> >> >>> >> >> >> this
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> discussion, I
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > tried to set ene_avg_sampling=1 with some
> >> high
> >> >>> value
> >> >>> >> >> of
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> ntpr
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> (I
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> expected
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > that this will shift the code to
> >> permanently
> >> >>> use
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> force+energies
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> part
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > of
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > the code, similarly to ntpr=1), but the
> >> error
> >> >>> >> >> occurred
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> again.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > I know it is not very conclusive for
> >> finding
> >> >>> out
> >> >>> >> what
> >> >>> >> > is
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> happening,
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> at
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > least
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > not for me. Do you have any idea, why
> >> ntpr=1
> >> >>> might
> >> >>> >> > help?
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > best regards,
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > Pavel
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > --
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > Pavel Banáš
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > pavel.banas.upol.cz
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > Department of Physical Chemistry,
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > Palacky University Olomouc
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > Czech Republic
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > ---------- Původní zpráva ----------
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > Od: Jason Swails <jason.swails.gmail.com>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > Datum: 29. 5. 2013
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > Předmět: Re: [AMBER] experiences with EVGA
> >> GTX
> >> >>> TITAN
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> Superclocked -
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > memtestG
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > 80 - UNDERclocking in Linux ?
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > "I'll answer a little bit:
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > NTPR=10 Etot after 2000 steps
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > -443256.6711
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > -443256.6711
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > NTPR=200 Etot after 2000 steps
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > -443261.0705
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > -443261.0705
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > > Any idea why energies should depend on
> >> >>> frequency
> >> >>> >> of
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> energy
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> records
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > (NTPR)
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > ?
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > It is a subtle point, but the answer is
> >> >>> 'different
> >> >>> >> >> code
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> paths.'
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> In
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > general, it is NEVER necessary to compute
> >> the
> >> >>> actual
> >> >>> >> >> >> energy
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> of a
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> molecule
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > during the course of standard molecular
> >> >>> dynamics
> >> >>> (by
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> analogy, it
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> is
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> NEVER
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > necessary to compute atomic forces during
> >> the
> >> >>> course
> >> >>> >> >> of
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> random
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> Monte
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > Carlo
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > sampling).
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > For performance's sake, then, pmemd.cuda
> >> >>> computes
> >> >>> >> >> only
> >> >>> >> >> >> the
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> force
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> when
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > energies are not requested, leading to a
> >> >>> different
> >> >>> >> >> >> order of
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> operations
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > for
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > those runs. This difference ultimately
> >> causes
> >> >>> >> >> >> divergence.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > To test this, try setting the variable
> >> >>> >> >> >> ene_avg_sampling=10
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> in
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> the
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> &cntrl
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > section. This will force pmemd.cuda to
> >> compute
> >> >>> >> >> energies
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> every 10
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> steps
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > (for energy averaging), which will in turn
> >> >>> make
> >> >>> the
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> followed
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> code
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> path
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > identical for any multiple-of-10 value of
> >> >>> ntpr.
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > --
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > Jason M. Swails
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > Quantum Theory Project,
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > University of Florida
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > Ph.D. Candidate
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > 352-392-4032
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> ______________________________**_________________
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > AMBER mailing list
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > AMBER.ambermd.org
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>>
> >> http://lists.ambermd.org/**mailman/listinfo/amber
> >> <
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> "
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> ______________________________**_________________
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > AMBER mailing list
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > > AMBER.ambermd.org
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>>
> >> http://lists.ambermd.org/**mailman/listinfo/amber
> >> <
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> >
> >> >>> ______________________________**_________________
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > AMBER mailing list
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > AMBER.ambermd.org
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>>
> >> http://lists.ambermd.org/**mailman/listinfo/amber
> >> <
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> >
> >> >>> ______________________________**_________________
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > AMBER mailing list
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> > AMBER.ambermd.org
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>>
> >> http://lists.ambermd.org/**mailman/listinfo/amber
> >> <
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> --
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> Jason M. Swails
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> Quantum Theory Project,
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> University of Florida
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> Ph.D. Candidate
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> 352-392-4032
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>>
> >> ______________________________**_________________
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> AMBER mailing list
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>> AMBER.ambermd.org
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>>
> >> http://lists.ambermd.org/**mailman/listinfo/amber
> >> <
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>>
> >> ______________________________**_________________
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> AMBER mailing list
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> AMBER.ambermd.org
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>
> >> http://lists.ambermd.org/**mailman/listinfo/amber<
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> __________ Informace od ESET NOD32 Antivirus,
> >> verze
> >> >>> >> >> databaze
> >> >>> >> >> >> 8394
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> (20130530) __________
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>> 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
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> > _______________________________________________
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> > AMBER mailing list
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> > AMBER.ambermd.org
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> > http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> > __________ Informace od ESET NOD32 Antivirus, verze
> >> >>> databaze
> >> >>> >> >> >> 8394
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> > (20130530) __________
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> >
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>> > 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
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> AMBER mailing list
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> AMBER.ambermd.org
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> __________ Informace od ESET NOD32 Antivirus, verze
> >> >>> databaze
> >> >>> >> 8395
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> (20130531) __________
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>>
> >> >>> >> >> >> >>> 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
> >> >>> >> >> >>
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> > __________ Informace od ESET NOD32 Antivirus, verze databaze
> >> >>> 8397
> >> >>> >> >> > (20130531) __________
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> > Tuto zpravu proveril ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> > GB_out_plus_diff_Files.tar.gz - poskozeny archiv
> >> >>> >> >> > GB_out_plus_diff_Files.tar.gz > GZIP >
> >> >>> >> >> GB_out_plus_diff_Files.tar
> >> >>> >> >> > - poskozeny archiv
> >> >>> >> >> > GB_out_plus_diff_Files.tar.gz > GZIP >
> >> >>> >> >> > GB_out_plus_diff_Files.tar > TAR >
> >> >>> GB_out_plus_diff_Files.tar.gz -
> >> >>> >> >> > poskozeny archiv
> >> >>> >> >> > GB_out_plus_diff_Files.tar.gz > GZIP >
> >> >>> >> >> > GB_out_plus_diff_Files.tar > TAR >
> >> >>> GB_out_plus_diff_Files.tar.gz >
> >> >>> >> >> GZIP
> >> >>> >> >> > > GB_out_plus_diff_Files.tar - poskozeny archiv
> >> >>> >> >> > GB_out_plus_diff_Files.tar.gz > GZIP >
> >> >>> >> >> > GB_out_plus_diff_Files.tar > TAR >
> >> >>> GB_out_plus_diff_Files.tar.gz >
> >> >>> >> >> GZIP
> >> >>> >> >> > > GB_out_plus_diff_Files.tar > TAR >
> >> >>> GB_nucleosome-sim3.mdout-full
> >> >>> -
> >> >>> >> >> > vyskytl se problem pri cteni archivu
> >> >>> >> >> > PME_out_plus_diff_Files.tar.gz - poskozeny archiv
> >> >>> >> >> > PME_out_plus_diff_Files.tar.gz > GZIP >
> >> >>> >> >> > PME_out_plus_diff_Files.tar - poskozeny archiv
> >> >>> >> >> > PME_out_plus_diff_Files.tar.gz > GZIP >
> >> >>> >> >> > PME_out_plus_diff_Files.tar > TAR >
> >> >>> PME_out_plus_diff_Files.tar.gz
> >> >>> -
> >> >>> >> >> > poskozeny archiv
> >> >>> >> >> > PME_out_plus_diff_Files.tar.gz > GZIP >
> >> >>> >> >> > PME_out_plus_diff_Files.tar > TAR >
> >> >>> PME_out_plus_diff_Files.tar.gz
> >> >>> >
> >> >>> >> >> > GZIP > PME_out_plus_diff_Files.tar - poskozeny archiv
> >> >>> >> >> > PME_out_plus_diff_Files.tar.gz > GZIP >
> >> >>> >> >> > PME_out_plus_diff_Filestar > TAR >
> >> >>> PME_out_plus_diff_Files.tar.gz >
> >> >>> >> >> GZIP
> >> >>> >> >> > > PME_out_plus_diff_Files.tar > TAR >
> >> >>> >> >> > PME_JAC_production_NPT-sim3.mdout-full - vyskytl se problem
> >> pri
> >> >>> cteni
> >> >>> >> >> > archivu
> >> >>> >> >> >
> >> >>> >> >> > 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
> >> >>> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> >>> >> > AMBER mailing list
> >> >>> >> > AMBER.ambermd.org
> >> >>> >> > http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > __________ Informace od ESET NOD32 Antivirus, verze databaze
> >> 8398
> >> >>> >> > (20130531) __________
> >> >>> >> >
> >> >>> >> > 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
> >> >>> >>
> >> >>> >
> >> >>>
> >> >>> _______________________________________________
> >> >>> 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 8401
> >> >> (20130601) __________
> >> >>
> >> >> 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
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > AMBER mailing list
> > AMBER.ambermd.org
> > http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
> >
> > __________ Informace od ESET NOD32 Antivirus, verze databaze 8401
> > (20130601) __________
> >
> > 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
>
_______________________________________________
AMBER mailing list
AMBER.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
Received on Sat Jun 01 2013 - 14:30:02 PDT
