- Marquer comme nouveau
- Marquer
- S'abonner
- Sourdine
- S'abonner au fil RSS
- Surligner
- Imprimer
- Signaler un contenu inapproprié
Dear all,
Recently I have testedapplication programs (VASP and CP2K)that I use on opteron clusters, and compared the performance of intel mpi and generic mpich. I am very impressed that intel mpi library outperforms, e.g. for 8 cpus about 30% performance gain can be obtained. We have several batch of platforms, having 4-core nodes, 2-core nodes, and 16-core nodes. The 4-core nodes and 2-core nodes are linked homogeneously by gigabit network.
I encountered significant performance loss after certain number of cpus involving in the calculations. For example, VASP running on 4-core nodes:
ncpus time (seconds)
26219
4 4059
82911
122134
1611319
Any suggestion and comment, or pointing toa right direction,will be appreciated.
Best regards,
William
Recently I have testedapplication programs (VASP and CP2K)that I use on opteron clusters, and compared the performance of intel mpi and generic mpich. I am very impressed that intel mpi library outperforms, e.g. for 8 cpus about 30% performance gain can be obtained. We have several batch of platforms, having 4-core nodes, 2-core nodes, and 16-core nodes. The 4-core nodes and 2-core nodes are linked homogeneously by gigabit network.
I encountered significant performance loss after certain number of cpus involving in the calculations. For example, VASP running on 4-core nodes:
ncpus time (seconds)
26219
4 4059
82911
122134
1611319
Any suggestion and comment, or pointing toa right direction,will be appreciated.
Best regards,
William
Lien copié
7 Réponses
- Marquer comme nouveau
- Marquer
- S'abonner
- Sourdine
- S'abonner au fil RSS
- Surligner
- Imprimer
- Signaler un contenu inapproprié
What does ncpus=14 give you?
What does ncpus=15 give you?
At a certain threashold, your system may start to shuffling tasks and data from system to system. Installing insturmentation code into your application might indicate what is happening as your transition to the higher runtimes. Insturmenting your code will not introduce an additional thread(s) to monitor the application.
Jim Dempsey
- Marquer comme nouveau
- Marquer
- S'abonner
- Sourdine
- S'abonner au fil RSS
- Surligner
- Imprimer
- Signaler un contenu inapproprié
Quoting - yimwlihpc.a-star.edu.sg
I encountered significant performance loss after certain number of cpus involving in the calculations. For example, VASP running on 4-core nodes:
ncpus time (seconds)
26219
4 4059
82911
122134
1611319
Any suggestion and comment, or pointing toa right direction,will be appreciated.
Just a guess, but your application may saturate your network. You may try to measure network utilization.
If it's so, then you may try to increase the granularity of processing and make it more distributed. For example, replace fully-connected topology between processes to more distributed tree-based or cluster based.
- Marquer comme nouveau
- Marquer
- S'abonner
- Sourdine
- S'abonner au fil RSS
- Surligner
- Imprimer
- Signaler un contenu inapproprié
Quoting - yimwlihpc.a-star.edu.sg
Dear all,
Recently I have testedapplication programs (VASP and CP2K)that I use on opteron clusters, and compared the performance of intel mpi and generic mpich. I am very impressed that intel mpi library outperforms, e.g. for 8 cpus about 30% performance gain can be obtained. We have several batch of platforms, having 4-core nodes, 2-core nodes, and 16-core nodes. The 4-core nodes and 2-core nodes are linked homogeneously by gigabit network.
I encountered significant performance loss after certain number of cpus involving in the calculations. For example, VASP running on 4-core nodes:
ncpus time (seconds)
26219
4 4059
82911
122134
1611319
Any suggestion and comment, or pointing toa right direction,will be appreciated.
Best regards,
William
Recently I have testedapplication programs (VASP and CP2K)that I use on opteron clusters, and compared the performance of intel mpi and generic mpich. I am very impressed that intel mpi library outperforms, e.g. for 8 cpus about 30% performance gain can be obtained. We have several batch of platforms, having 4-core nodes, 2-core nodes, and 16-core nodes. The 4-core nodes and 2-core nodes are linked homogeneously by gigabit network.
I encountered significant performance loss after certain number of cpus involving in the calculations. For example, VASP running on 4-core nodes:
ncpus time (seconds)
26219
4 4059
82911
122134
1611319
Any suggestion and comment, or pointing toa right direction,will be appreciated.
Best regards,
William
Did you try setting OMP_NUM_THREADS=1? This will turn off the open_MP parallelization in your code. The -O3 optimization turns on parallelization by the compiler. This is a new feature with version 10 of the compiler.
- Marquer comme nouveau
- Marquer
- S'abonner
- Sourdine
- S'abonner au fil RSS
- Surligner
- Imprimer
- Signaler un contenu inapproprié
Quoting - [email protected]
Did you try setting OMP_NUM_THREADS=1? This will turn off the open_MP parallelization in your code. The -O3 optimization turns on parallelization by the compiler. This is a new feature with version 10 of the compiler.
- Marquer comme nouveau
- Marquer
- S'abonner
- Sourdine
- S'abonner au fil RSS
- Surligner
- Imprimer
- Signaler un contenu inapproprié
Quoting - tim18
Quoting - [email protected]
Did you try setting OMP_NUM_THREADS=1? This will turn off the open_MP parallelization in your code. The -O3 optimization turns on parallelization by the compiler. This is a new feature with version 10 of the compiler.
After futher research I believe that this problem is with the multithreaded MKL libraries and VASP. The multithreading will hurt the performance of VASP. I have noticed performance decrease by a factor of 2 to 10. If you set OMP_NUM_THREADs=1 or use the sequential (or not multithreaded) library (mkl_sequential) you should get better performance from VASP.
By the way, why doesn't INTEL update the page on compiling VASP on their web site. The current version is totally out of date!!!!!
- Marquer comme nouveau
- Marquer
- S'abonner
- Sourdine
- S'abonner au fil RSS
- Surligner
- Imprimer
- Signaler un contenu inapproprié
Thank you for the heads up on the issue. I've notified the engineering team of the issue and look forward to them making the update and letting you all know.
This is the page that I'm having them look at:
http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-math-kernel-library-intel-mkl-using-intel-mkl-in-vasp/
If there is another place to make the update please let me know.
Quoting - [email protected]
After futher research I believe that this problem is with the multithreaded MKL libraries and VASP. The multithreading will hurt the performance of VASP. I have noticed performance decrease by a factor of 2 to 10. If you set OMP_NUM_THREADs=1 or use the sequential (or not multithreaded) library (mkl_sequential) you should get better performance from VASP.
By the way, why doesn't INTEL update the page on compiling VASP on their web site. The current version is totally out of date!!!!!
- Marquer comme nouveau
- Marquer
- S'abonner
- Sourdine
- S'abonner au fil RSS
- Surligner
- Imprimer
- Signaler un contenu inapproprié
Quoting - Aaron Tersteeg (Intel)
Hi,
The VASP user note in MKL KB has been updated to the latest MKL 10.2 version.
We will be updating the performance results with MKL 10.2 on Nehalem soon.
--Vipin
Répondre
Options du sujet
- S'abonner au fil RSS
- Marquer le sujet comme nouveau
- Marquer le sujet comme lu
- Placer ce Sujet en tête de liste pour l'utilisateur actuel
- Marquer
- S'abonner
- Page imprimable