Dear All,
I'm putting together a new Dell Xeon cluster running ROCKS 5.3 which
uses CENTOS (6 I believe). This is currently ~20 dual quad-cores with
roughly 16 GB of RAM each.
In any case, I wanted to inquire about hyperthreading. Does anyone
have experience on similar machines with vs. without
Hi,
These are nehalem Xeons I presume?
Then you get 15 to 20% more performance in Gromacs running 2 vs 1 thread or
process per physical core.
Berk
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 09:24:11 -0500
From: dmob...@gmail.com
To: gmx-users@gromacs.org
Subject: [gmx-users] hyperthreading
Dear All,
I'm
,
These are nehalem Xeons I presume?
Then you get 15 to 20% more performance in Gromacs running 2 vs 1
thread or process per physical core.
Berk
Date: Fri, 6 Aug 2010 09:24:11 -0500
From: dmobley at gmail.com
To: gmx-users at gromacs.org
Subject: [gmx-users] hyperthreading
Dear All,
I'm
% performance improvement.
(I guess the lower 8% number is because of loss when going from 8 to 16
processes
for mdrun for that particular system)
Berk
Date: Mon, 9 Aug 2010 11:36:35 -0400
From: chris.ne...@utoronto.ca
To: gmx-users@gromacs.org
Subject: [gmx-users] hyperthreading
I haven't
Hi Matt,
On Jun 2, 2006, at 8:20 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From my browsing of list archives I can only recall seeing advice
that hyperthreading
cannot offer more Gromacs performance. For all I know this remains
true if you're trying
to use MPI to accelerate single calculations on
From my browsing of list archives I can only recall seeing advice that
hyperthreading
cannot offer more Gromacs performance. For all I know this remains true if
you're trying
to use MPI to accelerate single calculations on hyperthreaded processors.
However, I
have discovered that it may be
6 matches
Mail list logo
