RTX 2080 cards based on the Turing architecture have a different maximum
number of threads per SMP (1024) as opposed to the 2048 on most other
cards. This shifts the place that some kernels need to be, particularly
the big non-bonded loop. I would expect to see some improvements once the
thread counts are re-optimized for 2080, which won't take long once I can
give it a try. Eventually I'm expecting RTX-2080 to give performance about
where GP100 does now, about 25% better than 1080-Ti and therefore slightly
better throughput per dollar.
Dave
On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 9:39 AM Ross Walker <ross.rosswalker.co.uk> wrote:
> Hi Marek,
>
> My expectation for 2080TI is ~25 to 30% over 1080TI. I should have some
> firm numbers in about 2 to 3 weeks. Note the cooling design is the same so
> the founders/reference design cards will have the same issues with multiple
> cards in a box as the RTX2080 and will need custom cooling solutions.
>
> In terms of performance per dollar things do not look good due to NVIDIA's
> price inflation. You are looking at a 70+% increase in price for a ~30%
> increase in performance, an increase one historically has always got for
> free with each new generation of hardware so I would not exactly call the
> RTX2080TI a technological improvement over the 1080TI. In real terms it is
> a step backwards by around 4 years.
>
> All the best
> Ross
>
> > On Oct 5, 2018, at 09:17, Marek Maly <marek.maly.ujep.cz> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Ross,
> >
> > thanks a lot for this first RTX2080/Amber18 tests and important
> technical comments.
> >
> > I think that your "1080Ti vs 2080/Amber18" results are rather in good
> agreement
> > with comparison of these two GPUs on
> >
> > https://www.videocardbenchmark.net/high_end_gpus.html
> >
> > But what I really look forward to (also because we are planning some HW
> updates ...) are Amber18 benchmarks with "RTX 2080 Ti", where seems to be
> higher difference comparing to 1080 Ti and also lets hope that in this
> actual "GTX Top model" will be also cooling a bit more satisfying...
> >
> > When do you think could be "2080 Ti/Amber18" provisional benchmarks
> available ?
> >
> > Best wishes,
> >
> > Marek
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Dne Fri, 05 Oct 2018 14:32:07 +0200 Ross Walker <ross.rosswalker.co.uk>
> napsal/-a:
> >
> >> TLDNR: NVIDIA RTX2080 works with AMBER 18, gives the correct answers in
> provisional tests and gets performance equivalent to a 1080TI as long as
> you don't put more than 2 in a box without some kind of custom cooling
> solution. NVIDIA price inflation is alive and kicking so perf per dollar is
> down ~15%.
> >>
> >>
> >> Dear Amberites
> >>
> >> I have finally managed to get my hands on some reference design RTX2080
> GPUs (another month or so for 2080TI) and had a chance to test them with
> AMBER 18. First impressions are that the reference design cooler for the
> RTX series is crap.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Unless there is a big space (at least 1 PCI-E unit, but ideally 2)
> between cards then the cards massively overheat, even when running their
> fans at 100% which causes them to significantly downclock. The following is
> an example with 4 cards running at once:
> >>
> >> Thu Oct 4 21:08:08 2018
> >>
> +-----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
> >> | NVIDIA-SMI 410.57 Driver Version: 410.57
> |
> >>
> |-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
> >> | GPU Name Persistence-M| Bus-Id Disp.A | Volatile
> Uncorr. ECC |
> >> | Fan Temp Perf Pwr:Usage/Cap| Memory-Usage | GPU-Util
> Compute M. |
> >>
> |===============================+======================+======================|
> >> | 0 GeForce RTX 2080 On | 00000000:19:00.0 Off |
> N/A |
> >> | 42% 76C P2 178W / 215W | 281MiB / 7952MiB | 95%
> Default |
> >>
> +-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
> >> | 1 GeForce RTX 2080 On | 00000000:1A:00.0 Off |
> N/A |
> >> | 90% 87C P2 112W / 215W | 281MiB / 7952MiB | 96%
> Default |
> >>
> +-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
> >> | 2 GeForce RTX 2080 On | 00000000:67:00.0 Off |
> N/A |
> >> | 93% 87C P2 100W / 215W | 281MiB / 7952MiB | 96%
> Default |
> >>
> +-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
> >> | 3 GeForce RTX 2080 On | 00000000:68:00.0 Off |
> N/A |
> >> |100% 87C P2 74W / 215W | 281MiB / 7951MiB | 97%
> Default |
> >>
> +-------------------------------+----------------------+----------------------+
> >> Note the top card runs well maintaining 76C at 178W with the fan at
> just 42%. The remaining cards are close to 100% fan speed, thermal limited
> at 87C and only drawing ~100W. That means they have clocked down
> significantly and are still overheating. I am working with Exxact to
> engineer a solution and I am confident we can get these working in 4 and
> 8xGPU configs but for the time being if you are building your own stock
> machines do not put more than 2 of these in a box and make sure you space
> them out. PNY are going to make more traditional blower design versions of
> the RTX GPUs which hopefully will not have this cooling issue. I should
> have a chance to test some of those in a few weeks.
> >>
> >> The good news is the AMBER 18 test cases, and the validation suites I
> have, all pass. Performance of the RTX2080 is on par (as long as you have
> the cards spaced out or have an auxiliary cooling solution), with the
> 1080TI, which is what history, and ratio'ing the flop counts, would have us
> expect.
> >>
> >> Note these are provisional numbers for the 2080. Performance may
> improve some once optimizations for the SM7.5 hardware have been made
> although I wouldn't expect any miracles.
> >>
> >> JAC_PRODUCTION_NVE - 23,558 atoms PME 4fs
> >> -----------------------------------------
> >>
> >> 2080 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 761.01 seconds/ns =
> 113.53
> >> 1080TI 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 776.83 seconds/ns =
> 111.22
> >>
> >> JAC_PRODUCTION_NPT - 23,558 atoms PME 4fs
> >> -----------------------------------------
> >>
> >> 2080 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 713.93 seconds/ns =
> 121.02
> >> 1080TI 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 733.55 seconds/ns =
> 117.78
> >>
> >> JAC_PRODUCTION_NVE - 23,558 atoms PME 2fs
> >> -----------------------------------------
> >>
> >> 2080 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 399.97 seconds/ns =
> 216.02
> >> 1080TI 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 409.26 seconds/ns =
> 211.11
> >>
> >> JAC_PRODUCTION_NPT - 23,558 atoms PME 2fs
> >> -----------------------------------------
> >>
> >> 2080 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 367.69 seconds/ns =
> 234.98
> >> 1080TI 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 377.10 seconds/ns =
> 229.12
> >>
> >> FACTOR_IX_PRODUCTION_NVE - 90,906 atoms PME
> >> -------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> 2080 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 130.48 seconds/ns =
> 662.19
> >> 1080TI 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 121.95 seconds/ns =
> 708.48
> >>
> >> FACTOR_IX_PRODUCTION_NPT - 90,906 atoms PME
> >> -------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> 2080 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 123.86 seconds/ns =
> 697.55
> >> 1080TI 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 113.46 seconds/ns =
> 761.48
> >>
> >> CELLULOSE_PRODUCTION_NVE - 408,609 atoms PME
> >> --------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> 2080 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 26.73 seconds/ns =
> 3232.72
> >> 1080TI 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 26.14 seconds/ns =
> 3305.84
> >>
> >> CELLULOSE_PRODUCTION_NPT - 408,609 atoms PME
> >> --------------------------------------------
> >>
> >> 2080 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 25.30 seconds/ns =
> 3414.99
> >> 1080TI 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 24.72 seconds/ns =
> 3495.08
> >>
> >> STMV_PRODUCTION_NPT - 1,067,095 atoms PME
> >> -----------------------------------------
> >>
> >> 2080 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 16.17 seconds/ns =
> 5344.36
> >> 1080TI 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 15.09 seconds/ns =
> 5727.20
> >>
> >> TRPCAGE_PRODUCTION - 304 atoms GB
> >> ---------------------------------
> >>
> >> 2080 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 1191.46 seconds/ns =
> 72.52
> >> 1080TI 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 1301.05 seconds/ns =
> 66.41
> >>
> >> MYOGLOBIN_PRODUCTION - 2,492 atoms GB
> >> -------------------------------------
> >>
> >> 2080 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 490.54 seconds/ns =
> 176.13
> >> 1080TI 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 448.95 seconds/ns =
> 192.45
> >>
> >> NUCLEOSOME_PRODUCTION - 25,095 atoms GB
> >> ---------------------------------------
> >>
> >> 2080 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 10.89 seconds/ns =
> 7935.83
> >> 1080TI 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 10.14 seconds/ns =
> 8520.32
> >>
> >> Note if you compare against 4 GPUs with no additional cooling the
> clocking down of the 2080s is obvious.
> >>
> >> JAC_PRODUCTION_NVE - 23,558 atoms PME 4fs - Runnin 4 independent
> calculations at once.
> >>
> >> 2080
> >> [0] 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 761.27 seconds/ns =
> 113.49
> >> [1] 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 676.54 seconds/ns =
> 127.71
> >> [2] 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 649.64 seconds/ns =
> 133.00
> >> [3] 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 441.83 seconds/ns =
> 195.55
> >>
> >> 1080TI
> >> [0] 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 776.57 seconds/ns =
> 111.26
> >> [1] 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 779.75 seconds/ns =
> 110.81
> >> [2] 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 773.42 seconds/ns =
> 111.71
> >> [3] 1 x GPU: | ns/day = 747.29 seconds/ns =
> 115.62
> >>
> >> So in summary:
> >>
> >> 2080 works with AMBER 18, gives the correct answers in provisional
> tests and gets performance equivalent to a 1080TI as long as you don't put
> more than 2 in a box without some kind of custom cooling solution.
> >>
> >> Of course this is 'modern' NVIDIA so price inflation is the name of the
> game so while the performance matches the performance per dollar is
> significantly worse. 1080TI Founders MSRP was $699, 2080 Founders MSRP is
> $799 so performance per $ has decreased approximately 15%.
> >>
> >> All the best
> >> Ross
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> AMBER mailing list
> >> AMBER.ambermd.org
> >> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
> >
> >
> > --
> > Vytvořeno poštovní aplikací 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 Fri Oct 05 2018 - 07:30:02 PDT
