Dave -
You probably meant to say:
"This is for Amber 6 and Amber 7 users only"
instead of
"This for Amber 6 and Amber 7 users only"
in the section on PMEMD 3.1?
I'll collect a few benchmarks and send you the data later this week. May
need to do a run or two, but it will mostly be stuff I have on platforms
you
all don't normally benchmark on.
Thanks - Bob
----- Original Message -----
From: "David A. Case" <case.scripps.edu>
To: <amber-developers.scripps.edu>
Sent: Monday, March 08, 2004 4:04 PM
Subject: Re: amber-developers: draft of the Amber 8 web page
> On Mon, Mar 08, 2004, Robert Duke wrote:
>
> > I took a quick look; I think things are fine. We may want to indicate
in
> > the link to pmemd that it is a link to the older pmemd 3.1 and that
pmemd 8
> > is different (ie., amber8 compatible) and available as part of the
base
> > package;
>
> done...see if what I said looks OK.
>
> > Might not hurt to
> > mention the superior performance of pmemd in the list of new features
at
the
> > top;
>
> Agreed: I have bumped the speed improvements up from a sub-point to a
> top-level "bullet" in the "new features" section.
>
> I meant to mention this earlier: the benchmarks page is not really ready
> for release -- we will be updating this during the coming week to make
more
> sense, etc. Contributions there (as elsewhere) are welcome.
>
> ...dac
>
>
Received on Wed Apr 05 2006 - 23:50:04 PDT
