Talk:NAMD Benchmarks: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
===Sample Benchmark comparing Days/ns for Cheaha, Biowulf, and DMC using InfiniBand=== | ===Sample Benchmark comparing Days/ns for Cheaha, Biowulf, and DMC using InfiniBand=== | ||
{| border="1" align="center" style="text-align:center;" | {| border="1" align="center" cellpadding="10" style="text-align:center;" | ||
|+ Days/ns (efficiency) on Cheaha, Biowulf, and DMC | |+ Days/ns (efficiency) on Cheaha, Biowulf, and DMC | ||
!Processors | !Processors | ||
| Line 59: | Line 59: | ||
|} | |} | ||
[[File:NAMD_benchmark_img1_Days_cheaha_dmc_biowulf.png|center]] | [[File:NAMD_benchmark_img1_Days_cheaha_dmc_biowulf.png|center]] | ||
[[File:NAMD_benchmark_img2_Efficiency_cheaha_dmc_biowulf.png|center]] | |||
===Graph's=== | ===Graph's=== | ||
Revision as of 14:12, 26 May 2011
Benchmark introduction Calculation of efficiency Scaling to higher processor count- Calculation for scaling
Sample Benchmark using NAMD
Sample Benchmark comparing Days/ns for Cheaha, Biowulf, and DMC using InfiniBand
| Processors | Cheaha | Biowulf | DMC |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 15.4054 (100%) | 18.0535 (100%) | 19.1000 (100%) |
| 2 | 7.7119 (99.87%) | 9.5163 (94.86%) | 9.7600 (97.84%) |
| 4 | 3.8933 (98.92%) | 4.9222 (91.69%) | 4.7570 (100.3%)* |
| 8 | 1.9653 (97.98%) | 2.5763 (87.59%) | 2.5360 (94.14%) |
| 16 | 0.9950 (96.76%) | 1.2658 (89.14%) | 1.3870 (86.06%) |
| 32 | 0.5101 (94.37%) | 0.6463 (87.29%) | 0.7438 (80.24%) |
| 64 | 0.2592 (92.83%) | 0.3390 (83.22%) | 0.3938 (75.78%) |
| 128 | 0.1360 (88.45%) | NA | NA |
| 256 | 0.0770 (78.09%) | NA | NA |
