On Wed, Oct 8, 2008 at 7:09 PM, Brock Palen <brockp_at_[hidden]> wrote:
> Your doing this on just one node? That would be using the OpenMPI SM
> transport, Last I knew it wasn't that optimized though should still be much
> faster than TCP.
its on 2 nodes. I'm using TCP only. There is no infiniband hardware.
> I am surpised at your result though I do not have MPICH2 on the cluster
> right now I don't have time to compare.
> How did you run the job?
time /opt/mpich2/gnu/bin/mpirun -machinefile ./mach -np 8
/opt/apps/gromacs333/bin/mdrun_mpi | tee gro_bench_8p
$ time /opt/ompi127/bin/mpirun -machinefile ./mach -np 8
/opt/apps/gromacs333_ompi/bin/mdrun_mpi | tee gromacs_openmpi_8process
> Brock Palen
> www.umich.edu/~brockp <http://www.umich.edu/%7Ebrockp>
> Center for Advanced Computing
> On Oct 8, 2008, at 9:10 AM, Sangamesh B wrote:
> Hi All,
>> I wanted to switch from mpich2/mvapich2 to OpenMPI, as OpenMPI
>> supports both ethernet and infiniband. Before doing that I tested an
>> application 'GROMACS' to compare the performance of MPICH2 & OpenMPI. Both
>> have been compiled with GNU compilers.
>> After this benchmark, I came to know that OpenMPI is slower than MPICH2.
>> This benchmark is run on a AMD dual core, dual opteron processor. Both
>> have compiled with default configurations.
>> The job is run on 2 nodes - 8 cores.
>> OpenMPI - 25 m 39 s.
>> MPICH2 - 15 m 53 s.
>> Any comments ..?
>> users mailing list
> users mailing list