[Beowulf] x86-64 NUMA vs SMP kernel: appl. performance?

[Robert G. Brown]

On Fri, 24 Sep 2004, Greg Lindahl wrote:

> On Fri, Sep 24, 2004 at 03:04:05PM -0400, Robert G. Brown wrote:
> 
> > What compilers have you tried, and what improvements do they
> > produce?
> 
> Robert,
> 
> As you might recall, I do work for a compiler company, so obviously that
> should be kept in mind. The 3 apps mentioned by the original poster

Impressive results nonetheless (and besides, I trust your honesty).
Since your customers are reporting them, I would assume that they are
just swapping the compilers in and out and not necessarily doing lots of
compiler specific tuning.

Are these fortran or C results (or do you know)?  And how much do the
compilers cost (and how do the costs scale over a cluster)?

   rgb

> are Gaussian, Gamess, and NWChem.
> 
> For NWChem we have a customer who reported this number for one dataset:
> 
> | Opteron-2.2+portland group:
> | Total times  cpu:      635.6s     wall:      636.6
> | 
> | Opteron-2.2+pathscale-1.1:
> | Total times  cpu:      514.4s     wall:      515.5s
> | 
> | Opteron-2.2+pathscale-1.2:
> | Total times  cpu:      480.8s     wall:      482.3s
> 
> So that's 32% better wall time for this dataset.
> 
> Here's a customer-reported result for GAMESS:
> 
> >	path     CPU=   1  CPUTime=  124.84s  WallTime=  126.10s
> >	ifort    CPU=   1  CPUTime=  148.10s  WallTime=  148.20s
> >	pgi      CPU=   1  CPUTime=  224.17s  WallTime=  225.60s
> 
> I can't seem to find a customer-reported result for Gaussian, although
> several of our customers are running it.
> 
> -- greg
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Beowulf mailing list, Beowulf at beowulf.org
> To change your subscription (digest mode or unsubscribe) visit http://www.beowulf.org/mailman/listinfo/beowulf
> 

Robert G. Brown	                       http://www.phy.duke.edu/~rgb/
Duke University Dept. of Physics, Box 90305
Durham, N.C. 27708-0305
Phone: 1-919-660-2567  Fax: 919-660-2525     email:rgb at phy.duke.edu