This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision | ||
|
acelab:namd [2015/09/02 11:56] mcawood |
acelab:namd [2021/12/09 16:42] (current) |
||
|---|---|---|---|
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| ===General Info=== | ===General Info=== | ||
| - | NAMD is a parallel, object-oriented | + | NAMD is a parallel molecular dynamics code designed for high-performance simulation of large biomolecular systems. |
| ===Useful Links=== | ===Useful Links=== | ||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
| The code is shipped as a compiled binary, which has proven sufficient for testing. | The code is shipped as a compiled binary, which has proven sufficient for testing. | ||
| - | x86 version: | + | |
| - | CUDA version: | + | x86 version: |
| + | CUDA version: | ||
| Download the two tars into the current directory. | Download the two tars into the current directory. | ||
| - | tar -xf NAMD_2.10_Linux-x86_64-ibverbs-smp.tar.gz | + | tar -xf NAMD_2.10_Linux-x86_64-ibverbs-smp.tar.gz |
| tar -xf NAMD_2.10_Linux-x86_64-ibverbs-smp-CUDA.tar.gz | tar -xf NAMD_2.10_Linux-x86_64-ibverbs-smp-CUDA.tar.gz | ||
| Line 37: | Line 38: | ||
| There are two benchmarks setup for NAMD, which will work with both the CUDA and x86 versions. | There are two benchmarks setup for NAMD, which will work with both the CUDA and x86 versions. | ||
| - | The smaller test case is the apoa1 benchmark, with 2500 timesteps and 250 step output frequency: | + | The smaller test case is the apoa1 benchmark, with 2500 timesteps and 250 step output frequency: |
| - | The larger test case is the STMV benchmark, with 1500 timesteps and 500 step output frequency: | + | The larger test case is the STMV benchmark, with 1500 timesteps and 500 step output frequency: |
| NOTE: the benchmark calculates a once off FFT based on the number of cores used, so each test should be run twice to avoid this overhead. | NOTE: the benchmark calculates a once off FFT based on the number of cores used, so each test should be run twice to avoid this overhead. | ||