Ben in my group is point on this. Ben where does it stand right now?
-------- Original message --------
From: Adrian Roitberg <roitberg.ufl.edu>
Date: 08/06/2013 18:33 (GMT-08:00)
To: AMBER Developers Mailing List <amber-developers.ambermd.org>
Subject: Re: [AMBER-Developers] NVE vs NTP timings for latest gpu-tachyon
code
Dave Cerutti and Jason had a crack at this last I think.
a.
On 8/6/13 9:32 PM, David A Case wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 06, 2013, Scott Le Grand wrote:
>
>> This why the Monte Carlo Barostat is crucial... I can't do much more for
>> traditional NTP - it needs more 64-bit oomph than NVE, twice as much in
>> fact, and that really hits consumeer GK104 and GK110 GPUs.
> Anyone know where we stand on this? Is the MC barostat running on the CPU
> pmemd code? (or in sander)?
>
> ...thx...dac
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> AMBER-Developers mailing list
> AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
--
Dr. Adrian E. Roitberg
Colonel Allan R. and Margaret G. Crow Term Professor.
Quantum Theory Project, Department of Chemistry
University of Florida
roitberg.ufl.edu
352-392-6972
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
_______________________________________________
AMBER-Developers mailing list
AMBER-Developers.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber-developers
Received on Tue Aug 06 2013 - 20:30:02 PDT
