Subject: Re: CCL:Athlon K7 chemistry benchmarks

From: Rick Venable <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 19:22:27 -0500 (EST)

On Tue, 21 Dec 1999, Eugene Leitl wrote:
> Very interesting results for g98 and CHARMm
> 
> http://www.cpureview.com/art_k7sci1_a.html

And apparently incorrect, at least for G98; the site now has a
retraction.  The K7 CHARMM numbers aren't that impressive either-- if I
scale the P3 result to the 600 Mhz clock speed for the K7, I get an est. 
612 sec, instead of the reported 642 sec. 

--
Rick Venable                  =====\     |=|    "Eschew Obfuscation"
FDA/CBER Biophysics Lab       |____/     |=|
Bethesda, MD  U.S.A.          |   \    / |=|  ( Not an official statement or
[email-masked]          |    \  /  |=|    position of the FDA; for that,
http://www.erols.com/rvenable       \/   |=|    see   http://www.fda.gov  )

---

From: Cezary Czaplewski <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 20:47:33 -0500 (EST)

The GROMACS programm has very nice webpage with benchmarks
http://rugmd0.chem.rug.nl/~gmx/gmxbench.html, and K7 and P3 results are
included for the same CPU clock speed (runtime in seconds):

Machine    Compiler   CPU Clock Cache SPC1 SPC2 Pep Micel HIV  HPr 

PC AMD     gcc        K 7  600   512    -  42   136  303  267  331  
PC Intel   gcc      P III  600   512   26  54   174  366  307  401  

As you can see at least in case of C code compiled with gcc K7 wins with
P3 on average by 20%

				czarek