I've queued the update for the web pages.
DSC
On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 6:15 AM Marek Maly <marek.maly.ujep.cz> wrote:
> Hi Ross,
>
> thanks for info !
>
> 1) So in your opinion two "RTX2080 Ti" in 2U or 4U server should be OK
> with regarding
> to cooling, am I right ? Probably also in this case (just 2
> GPUs/server) will be necessary (suitable) at least one empty PCI-E slot
> between the GPUs, am I right ?
>
>
> 2) Could be possible to add "RTX2080" and "RTX280 Ti" GPUs in the list of
> supported
> Amber18 GPUs - e.g. here http://ambermd.org/GPUHardware.php - soon ?
> We are using this www page in our HW specification, when buying some
> new CPU/GPU nodes.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Best wishes,
>
> Marek
>
>
>
>
>
> Dne Fri, 05 Oct 2018 15:39:30 +0200 Ross Walker <ross.rosswalker.co.uk>
> napsal/-a:
>
> > 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
>
>
> --
> 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 Mon Oct 08 2018 - 04:30:02 PDT
