[Pw_forum] Re: Re: Re: Woodcrest vs Opteron performance in pwscf calc. (Huiqun Zhou)

[Huiqun Zhou]

Cesar and list-users,

I'm sorry for my fault. You're right. As there is only 2 cores on one of
my woodcrest nodes are spare right now, I re-run the tests on them and
the opteron node.

Here are the results:
(1) Opteron 285 (2.6 GHz)
  Nearly same as my previous reported numbers.

(2) Woodcrest (2.66 GHz)
  1 core : 4m44s (4m42.74s)
  2 cores: 2m52s (2m49.49s)
  The results were got while another pwscf job was running on other
  two cores.

I'll run the same test on the node next week (maybe) when it becomes
totally clean and spare. So, we can get an impression of how memory
contention would influence the speed as Axel prompted.

Have a nice weekend!

Huiqun Zhou

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <cesards at msi.umn.edu>
To: <pw_forum at pwscf.org>
Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2006 6:04 AM
Subject: [Pw_forum] Re: Re: Re: Woodcrest vs Opteron performance in pwscf 
calc. (Huiqun Zhou)


> Dear Huiqun Zhou,
>
> In your job there is a line
>
> NUM_OMP_THREADS=1
>
> Should be
>
> OMP_NUM_THREADS=1
>
> I don't know how many threads your system defaults to, but if it is more
> than one, your tests are flowed.
>
> Yours,
>
> Cesar R.S. da Silva
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pw_forum mailing list
> Pw_forum at pwscf.org
> http://www.democritos.it/mailman/listinfo/pw_forum
>