On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 09:56:32AM +0200, Erik Lindahl wrote: > Hi, > > Quad-core is the way to go. I recently benchmarked the scaling of the > CVS version, and with 8 independent jobs we get 85-97% throughput > scaling, depending on the type of simulation. And you get essentially > the same performance if you run two jobs using 4 cores each. > Even for a single simulation parallelizing over all 8 cores (lots of > communication), the scaling is 70-90% with CVS.
I'll second that. With our systems, we got around 80% scaling on 8 cores as well. Considering the relatively low price of the quads, I'd definitely go with the quads. Besides, density might be an issue as well: a single unit in a 19" rack can easily cost 1k$ or more, so doubling the density may save a lot of money. A. -- Ansgar Esztermann Researcher & Sysadmin http://www.mpibpc.mpg.de/groups/grubmueller/start/people/aeszter/index.shtml
pgpf8N9q639xQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ gmx-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users Please search the archive at http://www.gromacs.org/search before posting! Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the www interface or send it to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/mailing_lists/users.php
